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
Without trying to sound negative or confrontational, I am a little disappointed that at least one forum post hasn't been made in this respect, and a little disappointed that the best option is to search for clues in the change log that, at best, won't really inform an average user a whole lot.
Back in November DAZ let us know that they hoped to have the Mac update ready around mid-summer, 2021.
I totally understand that when you’re starting a major undertaking like this, you can’t give a clearer target date; there’s just too much to do and too many problems you can’t accurately anticipate, and it’s important to remember as well that they’re working with a moving target, the Mac and Windows operating systems are always undergoing changes and updates.
In November, ball-parking an estimate of eight or nine months out was fine.
It’s now six months later, and again, I totally understand still not being able to predict a precise date for launch of a new version of D|S. Totally. It’ll be finished when it’s finished and even now tweaks to both operating systems can potentially require new tweaks.
BUT...
... after working on the update for six months or more, they should be able to -- at the very least -- give us an update. Is it still on track for mid-summer? Is it going well? Have they run into issues they hadn’t anticipated that might push the target date (fuzzy as it is) further out? Have they solved some key issues and hope to deliver earlier?
The bottom line is that to some of us, DAZ is a company, and as customers, one that we invest money and time in, sometimes a little, sometimes a lot. To some of us, we plan our computer purchases based on D|S.
After decades of investing thousands of dollars in DAZ, I would appreciate an update on the progress, that's all. I'm more than willing to cut them a lot of slack, as I mentioned above, as not all aspects of the proejct is directly within their control.
As an investor, though, I don’t think it’s too much to want to know how it’s going, so that I can decide whether or not to continue to invest in the company, or if it’s time to stop and look elsewhere to invest.
— Walt Sterdan
Would be nice if the log had a link to the software version being referenced. Why is that not possible? As I keep saying 4.11.0.383 runs of Big Sur...
Also, with regard to when a Big Sur version of DAZ will be released, DAZ must employ PROJECT MANAGERS to manage the development, and they have spreadsheets with drop dates. Even if you are using AGILE you still have a timeline projection. It seems quite odd that DAZ not to try to manage user/customer expectations/relations by being more forthcoming on timings...
ProRender 2.2 supports any GPU with OpenCL or Metal implementation. There are also backends for Vulkan and Direct3D12 for full spectrum rendering modes in the viewport. Works on Windows, Linux and macOS.
The problem with dForce is the OpenCL. Apple just don't want this API in their ecosystem. The solution is to port it to Vulkan, and that code can be executed with MoltekVK on Metal. That's the easiest way to do this. In general, the Studio must execute the components on at least Vulkan, so the MoltenVK option can be used on Metal. This will open up the support for Big Sur. Filament already has a Metal backend, so it can be a native port.
The M1 support is tricky. First the program must be compiled for ARMv8, which is not seriously hard, but the integrated graphics can be problematic with different features. MoltekVK could help here, but one of the main problem is that the Apple iGPU is an ultramobile focused solution, so even if the software is ready for it, the performance can be very-very slow. One solution to this is to open up the eGPU ecosystem for M1, but only Apple can do that.
Apple Silicon is optimized to run Apple's Metal graphics toolkit (and vice-versa), so performance should theoretically be at least acceptable.
Qt, the toolkit that DAZ use in Studio, seems to leverage Metal, at least in recent versions. However, DAZ is currently using a rather elderly version of Qt in Studio: the About box shows a 2015 copyright date, which doesn't quite predate Metal, but certainly predates the current stable release.
Based on snippets I've read in this forum, a major goal of the current development work on DAZ Studio is precisely to migrate to the newest (or at least a newer) version of Qt. If they can do that, Qt should handle all (most of?) the fine detail involved in delivering an interface that runs on Metal and so leverages the performance of the Apple Silicon CPU and GPU, without DAZ having to get down into the weeds.
Or so I have been led to believe. But I have no inside knowledge of what exactly the DAZ elves are doing behind the scenes, or what their long-term gameplan is. Or, indeed, how well Qt actually delivers on the promise of Metal support.
The performance problems are hardware based. The Apple M1 GPU just can't manage too much triangle, because it was designed around an internal memory, which is good if you execute an ultramobile level of quality, but the Daz models are just too triangle heavy for it, so the GPU has to use the external memory. In this case, the performance is much worse. The DAZ Studio can be rewritten to run on the hardware, but it will never be fast.
Well I guess upcoming Apple hardware (MacBook Pro, Mac Pro) will have better/dedicated GPU solutions - at least I hope so.
For the moment I don't have performance thoughts but would be more than happy to be able to use all of studios features. As of now on Catalina I have no fillament option and even no longer dForce support. That sucks big time with no idea when at least dForce might be working again.
Since I'm comfortable with the number of triangles I'm using on my 9-year old iMac, I have no doubt that I'll be just as comfortable for the triangle speed on a machine that clocks in at twice as fast as the one I'm using, and judging by how large video files are being handled in m1-native software (as well as the betas of Premiere Pro and After Effects) I suspect that an m1-native version of D|S might not be all that disappointing, at least not to me.
I'd be happy just to be able to run it on a new machine and OS with filament.
-- Walt Sterdan
The programs and operations you mentioned are 2D which are or can be handled by the CPU. Studio is 3D therefore needs a good GPU.
I guess you're right, I've been wasting my time handling all of those 3D triangles without a good GPU. 25 years wasted. Ah well, live and learn.
Thanks for the insight.
-- Walt Sterdan
Edited to avoid extending an endless discussion without real merit.
No please explain how you are not comparing apples (bad pun) and oranges.
I am truly an idiot for wasting more time on this, I admit that freely.
Still, you're technically sking for clarification, not actually arguing, and you did say "pleae" so I'll do my best to, as you ask, explain.
I will go over both our sets of statements and interpret them as how I understood them, if I'm wrong on any of these statements, feel free to point where I have made a mistake and then we can both move on.
I believe my "apples to oranges: comparison is more "fruit to fruit".
2D audio/video animation requires math calculations.
3d video animation requires even more math calculations, generally; I can create a very simple 3D render that requires less calculations than a very complex video especially with complex, 3D audio, but that's splitting hairs, and I agree with you that 3D -- in the vast majority of examples -- requires more math calculation.
So far, I will assume that we agree.
For "apples" and "oranges", I will just say that both are "fruits" that have a common requirement for math, and it's that common ground that I'm basing my comparisons.
A better or faster CPU will help those math calculations -- both of them -- go faster.
If you're able to access any or more GPU cores, this might help them go even faster.
I'm not sure where my logic if flawed, but you appear to disagree with that?
More importantly I said:
"Since I'm comfortable with the number of triangles I'm using on my 9-year old iMac, I have no doubt that I'll be just as comfortable for the triangle speed on a machine that clocks in at twice as fast as the one I'm using"
Translation: I'm happy rendering without a GPU, as I have been for a number of years, but that I would be at least as happy with a faster machine. If I wasn't happy wihtout a GPU I've have quit or gotten a Windows machine with an NVidia card.
Disagree if you like, but I'm standing solid on that statement.
"... judging by how large video files are being handled in m1-native software (as well as the betas of Premiere Pro and After Effects) I suspect that an m1-native version of D|S might not be all that disappointing, at least not to me."
Translation: Large 2D image manipulation (and occasionally 3D as well, After Effects actually contains C4D Lite for handling 3D effects and such) seem to benefit from making the software m1-native, I suspect that if DAZ were to be that I will not be disappointed.
Disagree if you like, but I'm standing solid that I will not be disappointed if they make their software m1-native and I have an m1 iMac. I doubt I'd be disappoined if they just got D|S working on an m1 iMac and let me use filament. I even said so, farily plainly.
"I'd be happy just to be able to run it on a new machine and OS with filament. "
Disagree if you like, but I'm currently using Filament on two of my Macs using VM Fusion and Windows ten and while I can do it, I would be happier to do it on a new m1 iMac, whether it's m1-native or not.
You replied:
"The programs and operations you mentioned are 2D which are or can be handled by the CPU."
I agree with that, and I'd like to point out that even 3D "can be handled by the CPU", adding that a faster CPU will help 3D run faster, even without a GPU.
"Studio is 3D therefore needs a good GPU."
You and I not only disagree here, but you're clearly wrong. I'm currently running DAZ Studio without a GPU, and have been for many years.
3D DOES NOT NEDD A GOOD GPU. Period. It helps, it even makes it more pleasurable and far more efficient, but "needs" is wrong. Again, I'm creating 3D images and animations without a GPU.
Not everyone wants or needs iRay or photorealism. DAZ Studio doesn't "need" a GPU. I would be absolutely thrilled if D|S couldsimply render an OpenGL image that matched the texture-based preview's transparancies, almost ecstatic, because that's what I really need right now, and I'm falling back to Filament in a Windows partition to get my job done. Give me the best GPU in the world and it's not going to help me.
If you want to continue to argue with my statements, please feel free, but you'll need to find a new partner.
-- Walt Sterdan
We do not disagree that a fast multi core CPU is good for number crunching. What I was saying was as much in to response to Rod Wise Driggo's statement, "Well I guess upcoming Apple hardware (MacBook Pro, Mac Pro) will have better/dedicated GPU solutions - at least I hope so.". The GPU is important when running Studio, if Apple's GPU is no better than the integrated GPUs in Intel and AMD CPUs that are aimed at the budget market Studio may struggle to run if it can run at all.
There appears to be a common misconception that "DAZ Studio" = "iRay". This is wrong.
Yesterday I loaded a scene with 20 Genesis 3 characters, all with hair and a minimum of 3 pieces of clothing each, with a single Uberenvironment light and I then rendered 30 frames of 1080p animation in 1 minute and 39.37 seconds.
I did this on a 2012 iMac, a 3.4 GHz Intel Core i7 with 32 GB 0f 1600 MHz DDR3 RAM.
To the best of my knowledge, taking a comparable Windows laptop (4-core i7 with 32 GB) and throwing a $1000 NVidea card in won't impact my 3DL renders in any major way, but please correct me if I"m wrong about that. If I'm right, then GPUs aren't reallly imprtant at all, unless you're doing iRay, and even then it's not GPUs, it's NVidia GPUs, as even a $1000 Radion graphics card isn't going to help with either 3DL or iRay.
But again, "DAZ Studio" isn't the same as "iRay".
I suspect that once Studio is able to run Big Sur (and, hopefully, whatever they're going to call OS12) that I'll see better times on my work even via Rosetta if I bump up to Apple Silicon. If they actually are able to make Studio m1-native (and, hopefully, that'll be enough for m1x or m2 as well) that I'll see even more speed increase.
If they go whole hog and adapt the software to access the GPUs, I'll be ecstatic. Again, doubtful, but you can dream. I mean, they can always go way, way out on a limb and implement the Metal API (with the Windows tools for Metal avaliable) and add another render engine for both platforms, but, again, I highly doubt it. I don't think it would make financial sense for them to invest time and resources in the apparently-tiny portion of users who use Macs, and I'm okay with that.
Still, I'm using 3DL, OpenGL and occasionially Filament now (mostly for testing and preparing my scenes for more Filament usage once it's available under MacOS) and that's all I need for the next decade or so.
My system -- 9 years old -- still does a little more than "struggle to run if it can run at all" for me and what I want to do and I see things only getting better with the new chips. Will an m1/mx/m2 ever suddenly scream through iRay renders? I very, very much doubt it, but my DAZ Studio doesn't have to; even if it could, I'm still not a fan of iRay, as I don't normally do photorealistic. When DAZ introduced it, my iMac's NVidea card actually supported it at the time but the tests I did back then didn't do much for me because, again, I'm not doing that style of render. The people who we see using iRay, though, are freaking awesome and their work is often nothing less than jaw-dropping -- even just flipping through the store promo shots is a joy to me most days, like browsing free art books, and are occaionslly inspireing. But it's not what *I* enjoy doing.
What we are seeing in real world examples, though, is that 3D programs like C4D, Blender and Poser are all running on the m1 chip and most of them are reporting speed increases over prevous Mac generations without being native or accessing the GPUs for rendering. None of them, so far, are "struggling to run if they can run at all". We're just not seeing that, and I sure don't expect DAZ to do so much worse than the others have.
Rendering engines like Octane and Redstift are running on m1 and as more companies optmize for m1 we may see some impressive stuff, and maybe not, but it's important to remember that this is still Apple's first-gen Apple Silicon for laptops and desktops, and they're not standing still.
With the lack of updates from DAZ, I'm still hoping to see DAZ Studio running under Big Sur with Filament in two or three months. Even if they don't go any further than that, I'll be happy and will probably puchase a new iMac for playing with DAZ (I use a much more powerful iMac for "work" for both MacOS and Windows -- I spend about 40 hours or so a week using Windows -- but I enjoy using DAZ Studio on my ancient iMac and a more recent MacBook Air, both testing Filament).
For the record, as well, my 2020 MacBook Air is currently running DAZ Studio even though it only has Intel Iris Plus Graphics 1536 MB graphics -- it runs roughly the same speed as my iMac with it's NVidea card (some things slilghtly faster, some slightly slower) and it doesn't "stuggle to run" DAZ Studio (which actually surprised me, based on what I'd heard here in the forms). I'm sure it's possible to create large iRay scenes that could kill it outright, but then, I'm sure I could assemble a scene capable of crippling a high-end workstation built to run iRay as well.
-- Walt Sterdan
Mid-2021 is fast approaching. Is the new version in Alpha yet?
http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dazstudio/4/change_log
With the necessary Qt update, I think one indication would be update of the "SDK min", which is still at 4.5.0.100.
Hmm. That's a good point. Correct me if I'm wrong, I don't see mention of that once it gets into the private builds
Remember, the port to Big Sur has nothing to do with the M1 processor.
Forget Big Sur. Apple has already announced the next OS upgrade (10.16 Monterey) coming this fall. The Beta is already out there. An honestly, I don't even care if ALL the plugins work or not. 9+ months is too long to go not being able to do ANYTHING with DS.That is 9 months of lost marketing material. Especially after spending close to $1000 in content, much of which probably won't even work any more. They should have released something that would allow at least partial usability while they worked on something more permenant.
That has nothing to do with the release schedule. It has already been said countless times that no DS 4.xx plugins will work with the upcoming version and it will be the responsibility of the creators of those plugins to update their plugins, if they have any interest and/or if they are still amongst us - DAZ is not updating these plugins.
Actually what has been repeatedly stated was that some/many of the plug-ins wouldn't work and would have to updated by the content developers (some of whom are no longer with us). But there is a lot of content created by the DAZ team itself, and it is likely they will ensure most, if not all, of that content will be updated as well to work with thefixed version of DS. But that isn't the problem I see. The big issue is that the core software itself doesn't work. DS won't even launch. Complaining about about the plug-ins (as many here have been doing and provided as the reason for the delay) in non-working software is like complaining that the AC doesn't work in a car without an engine... or tires. Or a body. Even if I couldn't render anything out yet, just having the ability to get started on basic layouts would be useful at this point. What is worse is that the DAZ team has shown little to no interest or concern for their Mac users or their customers lost business or productivity. Providing some vague estimate of a possible mid-2021 release made almost nine months ago, and then nothing since... That is not what you expect from a developer that cares about its customers. There should be a page, easily accessed, on the DAZ3D.com website, updated at regular intervals (at least once a month), dedicated to keeping everyone informed on the progress being made. There should also be a clear warning on the download page that Daz Studio does not currently work on computers running MAc OS Big Sur or later.
Exactly this. I'm not spending money anymore in the store because I fear Daz Studio will become abandonware for Mac users. There's zero communication from the company.
While I'd like a word from DAZ on how it's going and what we can expect regarding the update as much as anyone and am still a little disappointed that no status report has been given, I honestly don't believe they'll abandon Mac users for a moment.
It's very clear from Totte (thanks again, Totte!) and others that staying current with the Mac OS requires a lot more effort than with Windows, so even if 1:1 parity might not be reached feature-wise, it's not for lack of trying.
We'll see when it's released how well they've done.
That said, I've noticed that people are starting to use the phrase "mid-year" as the estimated release date mentieoned in November, but I thought it was actually "mid-summer" (can't find the exact announcement at the moment) so if my aged memory is correct, there's still a ways to go. It's not even summer yet, so people expecting a release this month shouldn't (though that would be great!). "Mid-summer" is more in the early-August time frame, roughly a month-and-a-half after the start of Summer, June 20.
-- Walt Sterdan
Actually what was posted in the announcement was the update was not due until mid-2021, which IMO means "don't expect anything before at least mid-2021", not "estimated release date is mid-2021".
True, but I take "mid-summer" to mean "the middle of summer" whereas "midsummer" refers to around the summer solstice. I'm probably in the minority, so forgive my error.
-- Walt Sterdan
Agreed, thanks very much for the clarification.
-- Walt Sterdan
There's numerous reasons why I've barely spent more than a couple dollars in the store this year (bad business practices, NFT horse crap, extremely tasteless promotions i.e. the AAPI Bundle, poor QC, etc), and the Mac issue is just one of many.
At this point, I consider DS to be abandonware for Mac, solely because NO ONE has said a peep since February and any legitimate concerns raised are silenced and/or dismissed by overzealous moderators. Even if it's just an update to say "We hear you loud and clear, and we have an ETA of X" or "This is why it's taking so long..." rather than vauge nonsense from people who don't handle the Mac side of things.
We are trying to keep the discussion to oen thread so that when there is news it can be replied to. As for taking so long, they are not yet late on their initial offering. I realise this is extremely frustrating for those who are, by choice or necessity, running their macs with Big Sur and cannot or will not use Windows via Bootcamp or the like but it probably isn't going to be possible to give a meaningful timeline in advance.
I work for many years with DAZ Studio (maybe 15 years). Now, I want to change my old Apple computer for a new but today, I stop to spend money in the store until Daz Studio run on Big Sur:-(
Please, Excuse my bad english