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
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
If it isn't broken, don't try to fix it - At least, wait a few weeks to see if the forums are filled with problems about it.
The Studio driver is usually released after the general driver.
'k thanks. I'll wait abit. C.
So if everyone waits who shall report about problems with it in the forums?
There are always those, who just have to have the newest versions, even when there is nothing wrong with the older ones.
I installed 471.11 and I haven't seen any problems yet with DS 4.15.0.14 Public Beta and RTX 2060.
That's good to hear, thank you :-)
I have run into a problem with 471.11 now, but NOT with Daz Studio or Iray. They continue to work fine.
The problem I found was that the Topaz Sharpen plugin for Photoshop crashes Photoshop. Topaz support said that they have reported the problem to Nvida. They said that Nvida confirmed the bug and will release an update later this month. Meanwhile, I followed the Topaz support recommendation to regress the driver to the May 2021 version. After installng the older graohics driver, the Topaz Sharpen plugin is working correctly again.
I installed the driver last night ... so far no issues that I'm aware of. First improvement it made was how Firefox works :-) It's back up to speed now.
In November 2020, Richard Haseltine wrote:
Please be aware that at the moment Daz Studio is not compatible with macOS Big Sur and cannot be made to run. At present the only option for running DS under MacOS is to downgrade the OS to an earlier version.
Daz is working on an update to address this issue, but it is not due until mid-2021.
It is now officially "mid-2021". Is there any news or projected date for a fix to allow us Mac/Big Sur users to access DAZ Studio? And specifically will that update allow us to update without Install Manager and its problems?
I can feel it .... it's just around the corner.
Please daz if you are going to daz 5 make textures folder out runtime folder .
The textures could go anywhere already, it's just that the /Runtime/textures folder is an established location and - back in the days of dual format content - using it made it easier to support Poser adn DS packages with a single set of files, to avoid duplicating what is uaully the biggest chunk of data if both versions were installed.
Why do you want to use a different location, and where?
More than that, a bit less dispersive folder system based on products.
For example, I have an environment? Data, Textures, props, lights, everything related to it in a single, easy to manage folder inside the library folder. Not a subfolder in a subfolder in a folder lost somewhere, where I have to spend two hours tracking down every piece.
Something like Library->MyOwnProduct->MyCozyShack->Everything-it-needs-inside-here. This way is more easy manage the library, look for a texture I want to alter or simply delete a third party product.
And a fix to the animations tools, after five years that they are broken, please.
While I don't think that would be a good idea for products, it isn't a Daz Studio feature but simply how the products are set up - and for your own files you can place them where you like.
Inside the content direct .
Runtime folder remember us the poser days .
we need something new for daz way .
Where in the Content Directory? If they were just in with the actual user-facing files that is a recipe for disaster if the user moved the content around. It does sound like change for change's sake.
We do remember the Poser days... The figure was in Characters, the materials for that figure were in Materials or Poses, quite often inside a vanity folder.
the system worked as long as you didn't have more than a hundred products, but when you had much more, it became an endless struggle to find anything.
As far as DS system goes, the products can be found quite easily and all the related user facing files are already in the same place, the only problem are the vanity folders and additional texture sets that are not placed with the product they are meant for, but then again the user can move and organize the user facing files anyway one chooses.
There are actually very few "vanity" folders. Such folders have !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! in front of their names so they will file first. When you make content it goes into a folder with your name and that's that. If everybody put "everything" loose in the basket, everytime a new file is added to the collection it would overwrite the old file and nothing would work correctly.
Folders with the creators name are also vanity folders, which make it harder to find what you are looking for - I usually just remove them from the path.
No they are not. In the data folder they are identifying "who" made the product. It is most convenient when wanting to remove products, esp. 3rd party stuff that isn't working correctly.
In the user facing folders, it would be very nice if each vendor chose one place to put their stuff instead of 5 or 6 places making it harder to find all their products. A few are out of place due to start up confusions way back when. For certain vendors it is very much appreciated that they use their vendor name so we can find all their delightful creations in one spot {i.e. RawArt's} For others who are perhaps not so prolific and/or confused about how to set up folders, putting their characters under the character's name is okay and many do.
It is not "vanity" to have and use your name PerttiA. If you make say 500 characters, it is fine to group them under your name folder as having a list of 500 plus ALL the others in one SUPER LONG STRING OF names is ridiculous.
I'm not talking about the paths of geometry and or textures, but the user facing files. When the creator hides the stuff in a folder named after the creator, the user should first remember who made the product which one is looking for, or when in say "...\Clothing\", you are browsing through your content with the down arrow, the vanity folder requires you to move sideways before you can see those products.
The texture packages are a thing of their own... Lets say there is a product "Summer Shorts", which is located in ...\Clothing\Summer Shots\ and someone makes a texture set for it, calls the set "Youthful" and places the textures in ...\Clothing\Xyshfd\Youthful\ - How is the user supposed to find them when using the shorts? Or even remember there was such texture set?
The whole point of putting them in the Runtime folder is so that they won’t appear in the content library. Why reinvent something new when it already works?
IMHO texture sets should indeed be in a sub-folder FOR the intended product to use it. Now PAs sometimes make their own additional textures and/or have somebody make them texture sets too ... and normally those are now placed in sub-folders so we can find them.
As a 3rd party freebie creator I would still use my name as a sub-folder but under the target product so people can find the textures but also so that there is no blooming way any of my work will ever overwrite somebody's precious purchases. It's too easy to have files bearing the same names, you know 'the pokadot dress' 'red' 'blue' 'green' ... so if we have The Pokadot Dress [main folder], mats [main sub-folder], PerttiA [sub-folder], 'blue' 'green' 'red' - those all would be safe if somebody added in mine to the same target but under Catherine3678a [sub-folder], 'blue' 'green' 'red' etc. Not that it's cool to be copying each others' product names, no, 'cause it's not ... but nobody knows all the name choices made for products sold by every 3D store on the internet. It is my understanding that many people when downloading content they do indeed start rearranging folders to their liking. Mind you some then wonder why the products don't work lol...
The term defn for "vanity folders" was explained to the group by the company many years ago ... they did not want us using vanity folders - the folders with !!!!!!! in front of them. That is all that was ever meant by that term.
Vanity folder isn't really an official term, so its meaning can vary by user - calling folders with the artist's name vanity folders is certainly a reasonable use of the term, though I agree that it is often useful to have products by a particular artist grouped (most significantly when they have a distinctive style).
Big Sur users (like me) have been waiting a long time for Daz Studio to start working with this operating system. The "workaround" is simply a pain. As much as I prefer DazStudio (and despite being a big customer), Poser adapted to Big Sur almost 7 months ago, and it seems like Daz has no plans to do so anytime in the near future. It certainly has given no indication it is working on this. I am currently using two computers - one with Catalina, and one with Big Sur so I can operate the updated versions of every other program out there. Are there any plans to make Daz Studio functional with Big Sur (and its likely soon-to-be-update) or is Daz abandoning the Mac market?
They are working on it.
That's what they have been saying for eight months, with no updates on when they expect to finish or if this is an issue they are taking seriously. My concern is that, by the time they finally get the job done, Mac will have another operating system update and using Daz will forever mean being one operating system behind on Mac programming. I just don't understand how Poser could get it done in a few weeks and Daz has let more than half a year go by with no updates on whether they are still working on it or when they intent to finish. Based on the last estimate from December, it was supposed to be out last month.
I think they have been working on the required Qt update, which in effect means the next major update of DS (=DS 5.0) for quite a lot longer than eight months.
It's not just about BigSur compatibility, but also about everything else that they have been planning to introduce in DS 5. The timeline for the final stages is always hard to predict or estimate.
Edit; The do mention Qt5/6 already at the change log for build number 4.15.0.18 (last one before 4.15.1.x versions, which I think is DS 5)
http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dazstudio/4/change_log
About Poser: They are actually not running in Big Sur, but in Rosetta 2 (I believe). It's a translator, which will probably eventually be dropped, just as Apple dropped Rosetta 1. There's some mention of that here, starting on page 61 of this Forum: https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/16599/the-mac-faq/p61
I guess the Poser people opted to run in Rosetta 2; the DAZ people probably opted to go for the full thing: Big Sur. Other Mac OS versions that come along will probably be versions based on Big Sur. I don't know why Poser chose one option and DAZ the other. But, in the long run, Poser will probably have to update to Big Sur or one of its variants.