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
Blender is still too complicated for many Daz Studio users... too many steps to get to results and it's a different mindset.
I know what Blender does and someday I'd love to dive in, but personally when I get excited about making hair move in DS using bouncy physics it's because it might make it easier to get that little tiny edge on polish and believability by adding one weird trick to my Daz process instead of learning another software. 90% of the reason Daz clicked with me where lots of other 3D software doesn't is that I can just...make a picture. Daz is for scene building and rendering, and everything I can see and click on is basically useful for scene building and rendering.
I once heard a Blender user talk excitedly about how it has so many tools and serves so many different disciplines that you'll probably only ever use a small part of its functionality, but for me that's what makes it hard to grasp. If I experiment and click around in there without building a solid skill foundation from basics (the thing my brain very much does not want to do and deflates over the minute I start thinking about it), I'm just going to get frustrated and encounter a lot of stuff that either blocks progress or flat out doesn't do anything unless used as part of a workflow. It doesn't seem to be like Photoshop, where even a total beginner can search "how to [some complicated effect]" and follow a 5-minute standalone tutorial, and that means I'm going to have to set aside a solid block of time to more or less beat it into my cranium.
I think you greatly exaggerate how difficult Blender is, but fair points, all. It's hard to feel the elation of having figured out a cool effect you wanted or having fixed something that was really triggering your OCD, something that would have not been remotely possible in DS, and not want to share it with your DS brothers and sisters.
Yes, Blender may be harder to learn than DS, but I assert everyone here initially sucked at DS as well, that is how learning occurs, and anyone will eventually be better at Blender than they are at DS now, because Blender's UI is better designed, and I'm not talking about superficial things like where certain buttons are. For example, Blender's concept of the selected objects versus the active object might take a day of playing around before it becomes natural, but it makes certain rote operations extremely easy.
You know what, I think that's my new mantra: "You'll eventually be better at Blender than you are at Daz Studio now"
Seriously, Daz Studio is as important to my creative endeavors as is Blender, I love the people that make up its community, and I think of the cool the things they'd come up with, given more advanced tools, that would enrich our community.
I'm kind of off topic, so I'll leave it there. And it's not like this tool is not a great step forward for DS.
I can see how all that would make sense to many people, I admit, so I won't try to argue with you. I'll only say that I personally have devoted some time to learn Blender, to let the shortcuts work into muscle memory, to allow the admittedly different Blender concepts to sink in, and I could never go back to Daz Studio. It's not so hard, it's only "flaw" is that it's different.
I will also assert that the ratio between Daz Studio's capabilities and the time it takes to learn it is far less than the same ratio for Blender, i.e. Blender gives you a greater Bang for your Buck in terms of the time you spend learning it. For example, if you learn particle systems once, well, now you know how to make forests, hair and fur, fireworks, rain, basically anything that gets distributed or is discrete.
and I have been using spring in iClone for a decade
I import it as BVH on animations into DAZ studio too
but yeah this is great for the vast majority of users who never leave DAZ studio
all they need is a decent FBX importer to bring their game characters in and life would be complete
I added a dForce dress to the animation. Everything went pretty smoothly (other than the dress taking 50 minutes to simulate! lol oy! It rendered really fast with Filament once the simulation was done though.). I haven't tried combining both dForce AND Spring Dynamics on the same object. I'm not sure if it would work or not, one might override the other). I'll have to experiment with it later. :)
(Make sure your audio is low - Youtube added the soundtrack at a pretty loud volume. Next time I think I'll just add audio before uploading.)
hahah! Thank you, Knittingmommy! I hope you have fun with it (and if you create an animation with it, I'd love to see!). It might be some "trial and error" to get the right settings, but I'm hoping that once it becomes more used people will start posting their "recipes" for what settings work best for what situations.
I'm honest with people who ask me if Daz is a good way to learn 3D, because if you just want to learn 3D in general there's no reason not to go straight to Blender and invest time in learning it. But if all you want to do is make pictures, I see stuff like MeshGrabber and Spring Dynamics as ways to carve out a tiny bit of functionality from much more complex programs and isolate them from a web of interdependencies for immediate use. This is especially valuable if you're not sure what your learning path is; in my experience, a lot of tutorials assume that if you're wrangling in models from other programs that you either sculpted them yourself or at least know your way around.
I have a bad track record of getting frustrated with dForce and looking up possible Blender solutions only to discover that what I want to do is a bizarre edge case and all the answers are some variation of "Why wouldn't you just model it from scratch and save yourself the trouble?"
I got a good chuckle out of this because importing FBX game models into Daz was actually the most recent "Let's see if this is something I can do easily! ...Oh" experience I've had.
I think I should just chill out and admit that that is pretty cool :) And it just goes to show that there is no platform on earth for which bouncing boobs were not the impetus for having soft body-like physics in the first place.
ROFL!
I shudda read the bit about turning the audio down before I clicked. I think my upstairs neighbour just tipped his hot coffee into his lap as my speakers momentarilly blasted the apartment block.
I don't quite understand what you are saying here. It looks to me like your animation has both dForce and the Spring thing happening??
Spring Dynamics are added to the Hair Fringe bones, and the Pectoral bones of the girl, dForce is added to the Dress. So there's no single object in the scene that is using both dForce and Spring Dyanamics at the same time. I've not tested to see if it's possible or not for a single object to have both dForce simulation on the timeline as well as Spring Dynamics effects on the timeline at the same time. I suspect it probably isn't, but I'll have to check it out. :)
I ran the Spring Dynamics script on the hair fringe bones and the pectoral bones and then saved the scene. I then loaded up a dForce dress onto the girl and ran the dForce simulation - then once the simulation was done I saved it again. Then I rendered the animation.
I did a test by simply moving the abdomen lower/upper side to side a few times with the default settings that come with the Spring Dynamics applet. The hair was not using spring dynamics, just the dforce simulation from within Studio.
I made a video that shows it full speed through several loops, then slowed down to show the arms, neck and head wobbling and lagging slightly behind the torso movement. Just in case it wasn't easy to spot the smaller movements, I reverse the clips and it's a bit more visable by her head and neck.
Ah yes, that makes sense. Thanks.
yeah I saw the viedo and get very excited about that belly jiggle effect, but didn't know it's done with a deformer.
"
"
anybody know how to do it like 1:32 in this video ? I really appreciate that!
I love topic like this, always bring out useful tools we often won't notice in the store that can actually massively increase your productive. If I just causually browsering thro this produt, I wouldn't even know what it is
And probably no one will search for it either if wasn't for this thread.
Experimented with painting a rigid weight map onto the top of the hair and applying Spring Dynamics to the entire hair piece. The first pic is the hair with Spring Dynamics, the second is the hair with the same morphs but no spring, and the third is my very sloppy paint job. It seems like the spring needs to be applied to the hair before any poses are on the timeline, or else the hair will go through the poses separate from the character.
Too much motion on long hair can cause dForce-like mesh blowups where it spaghettis out forever, and I couldn't fix it because once the springs are applied the hair has already pretty much decided what it's going to do.
So... how do you do something like belly fat movement? Don't you need bones with weight maps for the springs to work with? We've kind-of got them on the chest. We don't have them for glutes either.
I don't know much about deformers so I could be wrong but I THINK you can probably parent a deformer to a node and then move/animate the node? Maybe? lol I don't know, I'll have to look up some deformer tutorials and try it out. :)
Oh I see. Yes that would work. Interesting... but I don't think that'll be very useful for me personally. That's not the kind of thing you can export out to an engine.
Even exporting your figure is non-trivial, that is if you want the ability to tesselate it up to a reasonable geometry resolution. Then the materials... So you at least have to learn how to fix weights and things like that. Weight-mapping is quite a skill actually. I just about managed to work out how to do it well enough in Maya (I'm sure Blender is the same). Daz does the tessellation after all the morphing of course, i.e. it's kind-of the equivalent of having a tessellation geometry shader. The base weight maps are used to pose the figure and there's no high resolution weight maps (you get trouble with vertices inside the mouth particularly I have found).
Anyway I'm rambling...
Not to de-rail this thread, but some interesting discussion concerning daz v blender cause me to start a new thread with some of my questions. Those that care to weigh in (and set me straight) can find it here...
https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/451661/daz-vs-blender-help-me-understand#latest
that's *very* cool, 3Diva. wow--
:)
j
I don't know if I need this product yet because I'm currently switching between Blender and Studio for work, but I can say one thing: 3D Universe's video showing off this product is the best promo video I've seen on this site. Cute, professional, and informative.
lol Thanks, J! :D
Yeah, the video was great! I loved the little squid and the toon car! Very cute!
I personally found it impressive that they managed to do all that promo work about a product such as this without a single reference to "jiggle physics." Astonishing XD
On another note, I finally managed to get it to work; it seems my issue was with my baking animations to keys not quite working for some mystifying reason. Even now, it takes hours to bake a 120 frames animation, which I am guessing is far from normal behavior.
Do you need animate2 to bake to keys? I see no function to convert aniblocks.
It should work with the free version. Just get to the animate pane, right-click on the empty space below the tracks, and select "bake to keyframes."