Midnight Prophets
Newbie
- Apr 2, 2024
- 99
- 212
I suppose that's truly a last-case scenario. But knowing how my mind works, I'm going to want to find the source versus sweeping the problem under the rug, so to speak.
3D Software Help and Assistance. Ask Away.
- Thread starter Lt. Aldo Raine
- Start date
Well, we can rule out a normal morph doing it, I am not seeing anything.
The only other thing I can think of is maybe a D-Former or something like that, but that makes no sense that it would apply to every character. This is quite a quandary. Could there be something in your default scene?
tretch95
Well-Known Member
- Nov 5, 2022
- 1,403
- 2,623
Go through all your morphs on the figure, see if there is any are a at a value it shouldn't be.
Some bugged products may have a wrong default value set, like "25%" but it's written in the same greyed-out color like other morphs at 0%.
If you find a morph and don't know product it is from, check its parameters for the filepath.
Midnight Prophets
Newbie
- Apr 2, 2024
- 99
- 212
Thanks for trying anyway. I'm currently in contact with Daz as we speak. Prior to them reaching out, I did the Edit>Figure>Zero>Zero Figure suggestion as the other member pointed out, but it's a temporary fix unless I save it.
Well, that is an option, set one, and save it as your new default sub scene.
Midnight Prophets
Newbie
- Apr 2, 2024
- 99
- 212
That's great news. Glad to hear you were able to track it down.
I wonder why does Daz 3D not taking advantage of much more modern engines like Arnold, Karma or Redshift and goes with older engines like Iray, 3Delight etc.? License issues?
They help Nvidia sell video cards and get a cut of that. Pretty genius actually.
Yep probably on the ball here, until I see otherwise I'll remained convinced the entire daz ecosystem runs on snake-oil-seller culture.
If I may, it may be the opposite of what you and others are suggesting.
It is probable that the cost for Iray is much lower for DAZ (if I remember well, the dev kit may be free or almost, is the license that is paid), while the performances extracted from NVIDIA cards (which are the majority on the market) is better than others, at the same time being able to use both CPU and GPU (since Iray uses CUDA), having a material library that is for free and can be expanded for free (that is not a DAZ thing, is a NVIDIA thing, you can download the documentation and the toolkit to do it), and it is something that in terms of development and code is already well known and not requiring a big investment (DAZ 2025 is different as code, yes, but if you look, it is the UI libraries that are completely different, and they modified the scripts engine, for Iray they just use the latest version, but the interface to it stays the same).
For Karma, aside the fact "more modern" can be relative (Iray also gets new versions, so much there is a risk that end of next year cards that still work as hardware may not be supported anymore), from their own web page (
You must be registered to see the links
), Karma is primarily meant to work with their own "Solaris" environment (bad name choice for old timers like me, who know Solaris was also used as OS for some rendering workstations years ago, but no, it has nothing to do with it), secondarily with any other application using the USD format. It is true that USD format is supported also by NVIDIA itself for its "Omniverse" environment, but USD is a format to describe the scene to be rendered.
It would require rewriting completely most of the application to interface with the Karma through USD, and either develop a kind of "bridge", or throw away all the existing scenes, and honestly I did not check, but there is not guarantee a priori that even just for scenes, the USD format supports subscene sets, and how complex would be to include inside a USD file the assets as DAZ does now.
Again, I am not saying it would be impossible, but one has to look at the cost, both licensing and in terms of investments.
Arnold is a software from Autodesk, although there is also a plugin version, and if you look at the characteristics, it goes with x86-64, Metal and NVIDIA CUDA.
So, even assuming Autodesk did allow DAZ to use some API from it, DAZ would need to change completely their software, pay Autodesk that for sure would not be so cheap (NVIDIA gets its money mostly from HW, not SW, so their interest is to have lots of people using their software as a way to attract them to their hardware, Autodesk is a software company).
Incidentally, initially released in 1998, the first plugin version as render engine is from 2004, the company was created in 2009 and bought by Autodesk in 2016. The company that made Iray was created in 1986, but the "actual" (well, the first version of what we call "Iray") Iray engine was presented in a ACM SIGGRAPH paper from 2017, so, "more modern" is veeery relative
.I don't agree with some suggestions that Autodesk's products are an alternative equivalent to Daz (it is always possible to replace with a bunch of other software, the assets transfer being the main problem, but that does not mean being an exact equivalent), but it is doubtful that DAZ and Autodesk would try to reinforce what they may see as their respective competition.
I would need to get more in the details of the working, but there is also the possibilty that some things that are possible now in DAZ with Iray (I never used 3Delight, so I cannot comment on it, used only occasionally Filament) may not be possible or become much more computationally complex to do using the Arnold plug-in, since apparently it was based on a pure stocastic origin of rays based on Monte Carlo randomness.
If it is too "pure" in its approach, it is great to simulate infinity point sources like the Sun (well, the Sun is not 100% an infinite source, but is a good approximation), but can have problems for other situations, or increase the computational cost of the which means more hardware requirements and/or time requirements.
Redshift from Redshift rendering technologies (bought by Maxon in 2019 by Maxon, the producers of C4D) was first introduced on the market in 2014, which means that again "more modern" is relative.
Redshift itself says it is not compatible with DAZ Studio (see
You must be registered to see the links
), which means even if DAZ wanted to, it would be on their own to actually interface with it, and pay the license to Maxon - if they just open the possibilty for DAZ to use it, without including it with the software, they would anyway have to do the work and investment on their side, just to allow some people to go buy (rent, actually) the license for Redshift from Maxon.Also, it is true that it supports AMD cards and CUDA doesn't (DAZ users can use them for the Viewport and the dForce through OpenGL and OpenCL and I think the other renderers, but not with Iray), but the Redshit requirements in terms of compute capability for CUDA cards are higher than the version of Iray used in Daz 4.x, which means cards that can still be used now with Iray would need to be replaced - it will probably happen anyway with DAZ 2025 or at the end of next year when the drivers stop supporting them (well, unless one continues to use the latest drivers that support them for some more time ;-)), but it would create an extra cost and complexity for people.
Effectively, it would even create one of the situations mentioned in the conversation, if they did that DAZ would effectively force people with some NVIDIA card to get new ones.
In case of doubt, no, I don't work neither for NVIDIA nor for DAZ
, and if someone search will find my posts politley flambasting the DAZ support and their imcompetence and attitude, and DAZ's bright idea of creating a new version that will force people to throw away plugins working fine (and/or be forced to go "premium" to increase daz revenue and its predictabilty). But I work in IT, and they have seen plenty of times how people do not realise the cost and complexity of some things, and it ends up in waste of money and time (including public money).
I have purchased a used RTX 3090 and downloaded the Nvidia App. It asks me which driver it should install.
Should I select the Studio one or the Gaming one, as far as Daz 3D is concerned?
And what if I want to play some games now and then?
Should I select the Studio one or the Gaming one, as far as Daz 3D is concerned?
And what if I want to play some games now and then?
I went with the Studio ones. It is said they are more stable as they are tested longer.
They will both work for both uses.
The main difference is that the game ones are, as the name says, more game oriented, which means from one side may squeeze more juice in some functions that are more used by games, more friendly towards overclocking, and can be expected to be updated more often, though to be always towards the edge may be in theory less stable and probably less tested.
The Studio ones are updated less often, more tailored towards non-gaming use, but you can play games fine with them, even games made with e.g. unity run smoothy. In principle more tested, simply because e.g. someone making airplane projects having the driver crashing through a simulation will not be happy ;-), and those spend lots of money to get their high end cards.
I have an old card that is supposedly "geforce" (gaming), though not really, and two old quadro, I use the Studio drivers also because I use different applications including DAZ Studio, Video editing and capture, rendering, looking at CUDA development, etc., even in parallel, but that does not mean that in principle and theory you cannot do them with game ready drivers (well, the CUDA development tools when installing will check and tell you if they want to change the driver version, and to do Iray rendering, you do not need it).
Well, if we're being honest they sell you fantasy and wanking material
)Because it would cost insanely amount of money.
Most relevant has been said tho.
Altho i want to chip in and say.
All the engines you mentioned is also difficult to integrate into 3rd party apps, ie Daz
The Best render engine Daz could include is probably OctaneRender.
OctaneRender is the most developer-friendly choice among the four. (Arnold,Karma,Redshift, Octane)
Just got this (lune for G8
You must be registered to see the links
) and scanned it with virustotal and 5-7 attack scripts/malware files. Is that normal for renderhub? Also how do these script/files activate (when zip file is unzipped, opened via windows-file-explorer, or when its downloaded)? File Link:
You must be registered to see the links
- Feb 17, 2020
- 1,746
- 5,159
I'm by no means an expert, but my understanding is that you should be safe as long as you don't open the infected file. I can't understand how a file included in something you've bought in a legit store like Renderhub can include malware, though. Have you tried contacting the vendor or Renderhub customer's service to explain them the problem?
Kind of the wrong thread to discuss this imo.
but..
If you are using a older version of example 7zip you might be exposed to maleware/virus just by opening up the zip file.
This exploit has been fixed some time ago tho. just saying.
As for the scripts. you can safely open them in a hex/text editor. ie notepad++ and check its content.
It could be a false flag. perhaps because the scripts are doing some system calls that the AV finds suspicious.
Normally a script needs a interpreter to execute its code. ie py scripts needs python, daz script needs the daz engine etc to execute.
Good thing about script vs executable code is that its much much easier to see whats going on.
so if in doubt. just check the content of the script if you understand the scripting language.
but..
You can get infected just by opening a zip file. MS has patched explorer a long time ago tho and is mosly safe to use but SLOW.
If you are using a older version of example 7zip you might be exposed to maleware/virus just by opening up the zip file.
This exploit has been fixed some time ago tho. just saying.
As for the scripts. you can safely open them in a hex/text editor. ie notepad++ and check its content.
It could be a false flag. perhaps because the scripts are doing some system calls that the AV finds suspicious.
Normally a script needs a interpreter to execute its code. ie py scripts needs python, daz script needs the daz engine etc to execute.
Good thing about script vs executable code is that its much much easier to see whats going on.
so if in doubt. just check the content of the script if you understand the scripting language.