No encrypted for me.

DAZ_Spooky · January 2016

Jason Galterio said:

DAZ_Spooky said:

Jason Galterio said:

DAZ_Spooky said:

Jason Galterio said:

DAZ_Spooky said:

Jason Galterio said:

Spit said:

DAZ_Jon said:

Spit said:

We test with a lot of different scenarios, including on accounts that have access to every item in the store to see how it performs and works in the most extreme of cases in terms of quanitty of content.

Any results?

I would like to know the answer to this as well. My current suspicion is that DS is failing because of the presence of two graphics cards in my computer.

And before anyone leaps on the subject saying that their desktop has two graphics cards and they aren't having any issues... My computer is notebook with two graphics cards, which is somewhat different than a desktop configuration.

What two cards? (I am going to guess the Auros with a pair of GTX 965m?)

No. It's an integrated Intel HD 4600 and a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M.

One of the laptops I use for testing is an HD4600 and an NVIDIA GTX 870m which works just fine.

Are your drivers up to date? Which is the one that is being used for driving the screen when DS is launched?

Windows 10 Pro, 64 bit, fully up to date with all patches.

I have rebooted, I have restarted. I have run as standard and as Administrator. I have lowered and raised my Windows Permissions.

My suspicion is that what ever audit process runs to determine the system configuration is seeing one GPU and not the other. And then DS is seeing two. Or vice versa.

I have used NVIDIA Commander to force DS to run under specific conditions (only one GPU, etc.) thinking that one entry under the precisely defined variables would establish the machine configuration. Then reran DA and that made no difference.

And yes, I have tried with each of the GPUs.

Here is how I am running it. (Geneeral settings) Optimus is set to use the IntelHD as default for all software that is not otherwise specified. Daz Studio is not specified as needing something else. I don't specify anything for the NVIDIA card.

When I open DS, it is running on the Intel chip and the GTX 870 is listed in the advanced render settings tab.

Note that running DS as Administrator causes issues, please do not do that. :)

Tried that, no change. And I did turn off the Administrator option.

If you have a ticket in, it will get to me. :) I'll see what I can do.

Spit · January 2016

joeyteel said:

nicstt said:

Jason Galterio said:

Good news. Previous error message went away on the third entry.

Bad news, now I get this error message...

Make sure you have the postgreSQL installed (and the other SQL - valentina conversion) - DIM should show, if you have: uninstall, delete and redownload and then install. In the help section there is a FAQ about it if you have issues.

It can be firewall issues I believe, or at least I seem to remember reading somewhere. The main 4.9 thread has some help getting it working.

As I found out this morning, it can also pop up if the PostgreSQL daemon takes a little too long to start up as Studio apparently doesn't wait for it to finish load

And remember DIM runs it too so you can open DIM first and that will help.

TesseractSpace · January 2016

Spit said:

argel1200 said:

Spit said:
Have Studio 'check in' to authorize decryption.
Some complaints and snuffling but this isn't really DRM

DRM stands for Digitial RIghts Managment (though a lot of people like to call it Digital Restrictions Management since it is more accurate). The check in for authorization makes it by definition DRM.

I understand you're against it on principle and that's fine. But you'd have to check in for authorization to merely access the cloud anyway. So it doesn't seem a hardship to me.

With standard products, you only ever have log in once to download the product. From there it doesn't need to check itself against a key or anything. I could grab a dvd of backed up products from five years ago and install them on a new machine today without having to login to anything. And in five years even if DAZ is gone, same thing.

The encrypted products however require a check in either with the server or with the key every time they're installed. (And I'd gather they check against the key every time they're used since the software needs to decrypt them internally to use them.) Something happens to your key and you have to hope it's an easy fix or you're locked out. And if DAZ isn't around to help or decide they can't be bothered... Oh well.

The encrypted products are dependent on DAZ forever. Thanks to things like the DMCA, it'd be illegal to even make an alternative for them. And again if the makers of Poser had thought that way, we likely wouldn't have Daz Studio now.

DAZ_Spooky · January 2016

Spit said:

joeyteel said:

nicstt said:

Jason Galterio said:

Good news. Previous error message went away on the third entry.

Bad news, now I get this error message...

Make sure you have the postgreSQL installed (and the other SQL - valentina conversion) - DIM should show, if you have: uninstall, delete and redownload and then install. In the help section there is a FAQ about it if you have issues.

It can be firewall issues I believe, or at least I seem to remember reading somewhere. The main 4.9 thread has some help getting it working.

As I found out this morning, it can also pop up if the PostgreSQL daemon takes a little too long to start up as Studio apparently doesn't wait for it to finish load

And remember DIM runs it too so you can open DIM first and that will help.

With regards to this. I have found that if I am using Install Manager, I open DS before closing DIM and it transitions smoothly. If I close DIM (or DS) and then open DS before DIM or DS is finished shutting down, then it runs into issues, because DS can not establish a connection to a database that is closing.

However, and this is a big however, please do not install or update either DS or any plug-ins for DS while DS is open as that will cause a broken DS.

Daikatana · January 2016

Robert Freise said:

Daikatana said:

Spit said:

- No expiration date on a machine authorization: If you use the latest version of one of the Poser software packages, I am told you have to log in at least onece every few weeks or your software is no longer authorized and locks you out. I much prefer the DAZ implementation thank you very much.

I use Poser and have the latest version and have never experinced any kind of lockout and I may not open it more than once a month maybe even longer due to RL situations at this time

Also have it on machine with no internet or network connection functions without problem

If I wrote that in error, my apologies. A good friend of mine went away on a work trip for about 6 weeks and when she came back she had to fight with tech support to get her machine reauthorized and she was told it was a lockout due to her not having "logged in/updated something". Never even used a demo of Poser so my entire knowledge of this comes from her experience as it was told to me.

Oso3D · January 2016

Daikatana said:
Looking at all this has me wondering just what the encryption does do that is so onerous. From reading this, it appears that the encryption is put in place to prevent every Peter or Patricia Pirate from stealing others work. Thats not a bad thing. If it was my work I would not want it stolen. Heck, the very few images that I have made that I liked enough to put out there have a watermark that I spent the time learning how to make in photoshop.
Now I fully expect a few disappointed repiles to this post. I fully expect to be told that I "caved in" and am "asking for the walled garden". Feel free to say those things to me. It will not matter. I would much rather be honest and admit that when I heard the words "DRM" and "Encryption" that I reacted in a knee jerk fashion based on past experiences with DRM that failed badly. Now, after stepping back and trying to be more objective, I can honestly say that while I dont like it AT ALL. I can see the reason for it and can possibly bring my self to put up with what is in essence some pretty unrestrictive changes. The only thing this encryption is really doing -at this point- is making it harder for people to steal from DAZ3D or the various content creators. Given that we all want DAZ to stay in business to feed our addiction, is that such a bad thing?

1) It will stop a small fraction of Pirates and most of those sites will still be disseminating stuff that was encrypted.

2) There will be problems just from the sheer nature of 'making the process more complicated'

3) People have a number of cases that make encryption difficult. Each of those cases represent a small number of users, perhaps, but overall it adds up.

4) There are a variety of scripts and utilities that won't work with encrypted content without people going through a bunch of hoops ... hoops that would also let pirates pirate.

5) No longer files you can open up and look at.

6) A past history of unpredictability about what Daz is going to do next with this, and a tendency for DRM to get worse. Particularly when Daz goes 'oh hey, this DRM isn't really stemming all this piracy, we must do more!'

So, basically, it doesn't actually solve the problem and introduces a bunch of problems to many legitimate users.

At best, Daz is succumbing to a pinhead pointy haired boss who doesn't understand the situation. Or maybe trying to hand-hold some nervous investors.

nicstt · January 2016

Leana said:

TesseractSpace said:

To clarify, my concern is that when we've accepted enough encrypted product, they might decided Studio 5.x will only use encrypted products

That would be quite difficult to do though: they still need content creators to be able to create new items, and when you create new content it has to be unencrypted or nobody else can use it....

Spit said:

I read that the database format changes as part of the installation. Will this affect Studio 4.8 if you try to go back to it?

4.9 uses new tables, the data are copied to those when you open it the first time. So your 4.8 data doesn't change.

Content creators, could get access to unlocked Daz, just like they get access to HD morphs.

Daikatana · January 2016

Daikatana said:
WLooking at all this has me wondering just what the encryption does do that is so onerous. From reading this, it appears that the encryption is put in place to prevent every Peter or Patricia Pirate from stealing others work. Thats not a bad thing. If it was my work I would not want it stolen. Heck, the very few images that I have made that I liked enough to put out there have a watermark that I spent the time learning how to make in photoshop.

timmins.william said:

Daikatana said:

Now I fully expect a few disappointed repiles to this post. I fully expect to be told that I "caved in" and am "asking for the walled garden". Feel free to say those things to me. It will not matter. I would much rather be honest and admit that when I heard the words "DRM" and "Encryption" that I reacted in a knee jerk fashion based on past experiences with DRM that failed badly. Now, after stepping back and trying to be more objective, I can honestly say that while I dont like it AT ALL. I can see the reason for it and can possibly bring my self to put up with what is in essence some pretty unrestrictive changes. The only thing this encryption is really doing -at this point- is making it harder for people to steal from DAZ3D or the various content creators. Given that we all want DAZ to stay in business to feed our addiction, is that such a bad thing?

1) It will stop a small fraction of Pirates and most of those sites will still be disseminating stuff that was encrypted.

2) There will be problems just from the sheer nature of 'making the process more complicated'

3) People have a number of cases that make encryption difficult. Each of those cases represent a small number of users, perhaps, but overall it adds up.

4) There are a variety of scripts and utilities that won't work with encrypted content without people going through a bunch of hoops ... hoops that would also let pirates pirate.

5) No longer files you can open up and look at.

6) A past history of unpredictability about what Daz is going to do next with this, and a tendency for DRM to get worse. Particularly when Daz goes 'oh hey, this DRM isn't really stemming all this piracy, we must do more!'

So, basically, it doesn't actually solve the problem and introduces a bunch of problems to many legitimate users.

At best, Daz is succumbing to a pinhead pointy haired boss who doesn't understand the situation. Or maybe trying to hand-hold some nervous investors.

Who knows. *shrug* They will probably never tell us.

nicstt · January 2016

DAZ_Spooky said:

Spit said:

Leana said:

Spit said:

Will somebody explain the necessity of each product being stored as its own runtime? With a filename that is the product ID. That can't be installed where we want it

That makes updates and uninstalling easier: if all the files for a product are in a special directory and can't be moved by the end user then the program knows exactly where they are and what it can delete / update.

Well, that's a lousy tradeoff. And what does that have to do with encryption?

It has absolutely nothing to do with encryption.

Yeh DRM is awsome for helping customers 'find-their-stuff'.

And please stop referring to your DRM as encryption, they are not the same; DRM uses encryption, but so do other features of computer software.

j cade · January 2016

nicstt said:

Content creators, could get access to unlocked Daz, just like they get access to HD morphs.

Except that that would mean there could be no new vendors, Daz likes new vendors. Mo' Vendors. Mo' Moneys.

nicstt said:

DAZ_Spooky said:

Spit said:

Leana said:

Spit said:

Will somebody explain the necessity of each product being stored as its own runtime? With a filename that is the product ID. That can't be installed where we want it

That makes updates and uninstalling easier: if all the files for a product are in a special directory and can't be moved by the end user then the program knows exactly where they are and what it can delete / update.

Well, that's a lousy tradeoff. And what does that have to do with encryption?

It has absolutely nothing to do with encryption.

Yeh DRM is awsome for helping customers 'find-their-stuff'.

And please stop referring to your DRM as encryption, they are not the same; DRM uses encryption, but so do other features of computer software.

There are 2 parts to the Connect rollout, It is Encryption/DRM/Whatever capable, but it is also a new (and in the eyes of the daz folks, easier) content delivery system, Setting up files so its easier to uninstall/update one thing without breaking another is a noble goal, I don't like the trade off personally, because I do a lot of manually selecting things like textures through my file browser, but all of that is indeed a completely seperate thing from Encryption/DRM/Whatever.

RCTSpanky · January 2016

First DAZ say Goodbye to their loyal Poser customers with Genesis 3, now they are on the way to split the rest of their users in two groups with their Content Connect and will lost more loyal customers. Looks like a kind of suicide in rates to me.

nicstt · January 2016

j cade said:

nicstt said:

Content creators, could get access to unlocked Daz, just like they get access to HD morphs.

Except that that would mean there could be no new vendors, Daz likes new vendors. Mo' Vendors. Mo' Moneys.

nicstt said:

DAZ_Spooky said:

Spit said:

Leana said:

Spit said:

Will somebody explain the necessity of each product being stored as its own runtime? With a filename that is the product ID. That can't be installed where we want it

That makes updates and uninstalling easier: if all the files for a product are in a special directory and can't be moved by the end user then the program knows exactly where they are and what it can delete / update.

Well, that's a lousy tradeoff. And what does that have to do with encryption?

It has absolutely nothing to do with encryption.

Yeh DRM is awsome for helping customers 'find-their-stuff'.

And please stop referring to your DRM as encryption, they are not the same; DRM uses encryption, but so do other features of computer software.

There are 2 parts to the Connect rollout, It is Encryption/DRM/Whatever capable, but it is also a new (and in the eyes of the daz folks, easier) content delivery system, Setting up files so its easier to uninstall/update one thing without breaking another is a noble goal, I don't like the trade off personally, because I do a lot of manually selecting things like textures through my file browser, but all of that is indeed a completely seperate thing from Encryption/DRM/Whatever.

Oh I totally understand that Daz Connect is not the DRM, and it could incorporate (or not) encryption if there was no DRM in Daz software.

Daz folks don't as far as I've seen refer to it as DRM; that actually adds to the suspicion imo. I'd be interested in the connect if the encryption wasn't there, but likely not enough to put up with a piece of software that wants internet acess. Having said that i have blocked it. I like the IRAY improvement, but recon I'll revert to 4.8 when I recover from a Disk Image.

DAZ_Spooky · January 2016

nicstt said:

j cade said:

nicstt said:

Content creators, could get access to unlocked Daz, just like they get access to HD morphs.

Except that that would mean there could be no new vendors, Daz likes new vendors. Mo' Vendors. Mo' Moneys.

nicstt said:

DAZ_Spooky said:

Spit said:

Leana said:

Spit said:

Will somebody explain the necessity of each product being stored as its own runtime? With a filename that is the product ID. That can't be installed where we want it

That makes updates and uninstalling easier: if all the files for a product are in a special directory and can't be moved by the end user then the program knows exactly where they are and what it can delete / update.

Well, that's a lousy tradeoff. And what does that have to do with encryption?

It has absolutely nothing to do with encryption.

Yeh DRM is awsome for helping customers 'find-their-stuff'.

And please stop referring to your DRM as encryption, they are not the same; DRM uses encryption, but so do other features of computer software.

There are 2 parts to the Connect rollout, It is Encryption/DRM/Whatever capable, but it is also a new (and in the eyes of the daz folks, easier) content delivery system, Setting up files so its easier to uninstall/update one thing without breaking another is a noble goal, I don't like the trade off personally, because I do a lot of manually selecting things like textures through my file browser, but all of that is indeed a completely seperate thing from Encryption/DRM/Whatever.

Oh I totally understand that Daz Connect is not the DRM, and it could incorporate (or not) encryption if there was no DRM in Daz software.

Daz folks don't as far as I've seen refer to it as DRM; that actually adds to the suspicion imo. I'd be interested in the connect if the encryption wasn't there, but likely not enough to put up with a piece of software that wants internet acess. Having said that i have blocked it. I like the IRAY improvement, but recon I'll revert to 4.8 when I recover from a Disk Image.

The official Daz 3D statement on on Encryption and DRM.

Cybernikes · January 2016

One last thing;

I have been a member since 2007, I have felt the need to post exactly six times, all of them on this topic.

Many of you have made good points on both sides of the issue, you can not however change the way I feel.

I just tallied up my customer sheet as to what I have actually spent (VS my very low estimate) so here is my final score if you are at all interested.

DAZ without connect, $30,336.05 dollars,

DAZ after connect, $ 0.00 dollars,

I'm done talking. (Edited membership officially canceled)

Tigerschnecke · January 2016

I am still worried that my workflow will be seriously compromised by this move toward encryption-only content. My main machine to control all the content (and do non 3D-related work) is my laptop. However, it dramatically overheats if I try to use IRAY, and it is not intended to run it. Instead, like a previous poster, I use Dropbox to synchronize my content libraries with a desktop machine that has a powerful graphics card as well as a license for Octance Render via the Poser plugin (I do not have a license for DAZ Studio for Octane). However, I actually far more frequently use Luxrender via the Reality plugin for which I use yet another machine in my office to render (usually overnight) sets of images via 4 connected nodes.

I.e., I have so far been able to use my main work machine to set things up, have all materials autosynchronize via Dropbox to both the desktop (for Octane), and the other machine (actually another laptop) to play the master for the luxrender nodes. Finally, I use the desktop machine to host the rendering of Poser versions of the same sets of images via the Queue manager. I.e., I typically set things up on my main laptop (that I also take home, from where things are connected to the office via VPN and tight VNC) and outsource all the actual rendering. This has been a good workflow for me, since I need to create a very narrow range of images but these need to be the best possible quality that I can manage. The different rendering engines have different strengths (and some things I still fail to manage in Luxrender) - so what I do in the end is to create difference images in Photoshop and then blending everything together again from the different source images to create the final images after a lot of filtering etc. Nevertheless, I need to be able to open content from different machines as well as synchronize an accessible library via Dropbox - eventhough I am actually only working on one copy at a time.

In addition to having a lot of potential to screw up my workflow, encrypted resources seem a lot less valuable to me overall and a likely pain and cause of headaches to use. I may still be buying some but if given the choice, unencrypted is worth significantly more to me (and I will be willing to pay much less for encrypted content). E.g., I only recently bought a license for the Adobe Creative Master Suite CS6 since I would rather have a slightly outdated version of the software for which I own an actual time-unlimited license than even a discounted monthly fee.

Finally, I find it very unfriendly of DAZ to sneak into delivering encryption-only content the way they are doing it. I have literally been spending thousands of dollars on content here over the last couple of years and that there seems to be basically no true "customer appreciation" outside of advertisements in the form of so-called "customer appreciation sales" greatly annoys me. I may still have to buy things here but in my heart I hope there will be competition to this type of business model that won't follow this type of fake pure-business friendliness.

TesseractSpace · January 2016

So they're now admitting it's DRM. Kinda. Still a bit of weaseling going on in that FAQ.

And it looks like no DSON to Poser for encrypted content. Even if the content would have been able to use the plugin had it not been encrypted.

Guess DAZ has decided they really don't care if they drive away customers. Wonder when all new products will be encrypted only and Studio stops accepting non-encrypted content? After all we can see that 'no plans' just means they're not done setting it up.

Maybe I've been in this hobby too long if I don't want to be treated like a potential thief just because I want to use the content I paid for without having DAZ looking over my shoulder to make sure it's all legit whenever I try to use it.

SnowSultan · January 2016

Where are you guys reading that your encyrpted content is being checked for authenticity every time you try to use it?

Jason Galterio · January 2016

SnowSultan said:

Where are you guys reading that your encyrpted content is being checked for authenticity every time you try to use it?

If it wasn't, I doubt I would be getting a message to re-authenticate every time I open DS.

TesseractSpace · January 2016

SnowSultan said:
Where are you guys reading that your encyrpted content is being checked for authenticity every time you try to use it?

It has be be decrypted, ergo it must check against whatever key is generated by logging in. Even if it doesn't have to be logged in at the time, if something happened to the key it would likely not be able to decrypt until the key was restored.

Tigerschnecke · January 2016

Just cancelled my PA-subscription. Perhaps, if enough people did that, it would be noticed by the uber-important sales machine driving this site. Could always re-subscribe in case there is still any worthwhile unencrypted content to be had in a couple of weeks/months.

DAZ_Spooky · January 2016

TesseractSpace said:

So they're now admitting it's DRM.

It has been there the whole time, though it was reworded (slightly) right after the first Beta release. It has been referenced many times, in many threads, including this one.

So I am confused by your statement. Am I misunderstanding your implication?

Richard Haseltine · January 2016

-

Tigerschnecke said:

I am still worried that my workflow will be seriously compromised by this move toward encryption-only content. My main machine to control all the content (and do non 3D-related work) is my laptop. However, it dramatically overheats if I try to use IRAY, and it is not intended to run it. Instead, like a previous poster, I use Dropbox to synchronize my content libraries with a desktop machine that has a powerful graphics card as well as a license for Octance Render via the Poser plugin (I do not have a license for DAZ Studio for Octane). However, I actually far more frequently use Luxrender via the Reality plugin for which I use yet another machine in my office to render (usually overnight) sets of images via 4 connected nodes.

I.e., I have so far been able to use my main work machine to set things up, have all materials autosynchronize via Dropbox to both the desktop (for Octane), and the other machine (actually another laptop) to play the master for the luxrender nodes. Finally, I use the desktop machine to host the rendering of Poser versions of the same sets of images via the Queue manager. I.e., I typically set things up on my main laptop (that I also take home, from where things are connected to the office via VPN and tight VNC) and outsource all the actual rendering. This has been a good workflow for me, since I need to create a very narrow range of images but these need to be the best possible quality that I can manage. The different rendering engines have different strengths (and some things I still fail to manage in Luxrender) - so what I do in the end is to create difference images in Photoshop and then blending everything together again from the different source images to create the final images after a lot of filtering etc. Nevertheless, I need to be able to open content from different machines as well as synchronize an accessible library via Dropbox - eventhough I am actually only working on one copy at a time.

In addition to having a lot of potential to screw up my workflow, encrypted resources seem a lot less valuable to me overall and a likely pain and cause of headaches to use. I may still be buying some but if given the choice, unencrypted is worth significantly more to me (and I will be willing to pay much less for encrypted content). E.g., I only recently bought a license for the Adobe Creative Master Suite CS6 since I would rather have a slightly outdated version of the software for which I own an actual time-unlimited license than even a discounted monthly fee.

Finally, I find it very unfriendly of DAZ to sneak into delivering encryption-only content the way they are doing it. I have literally been spending thousands of dollars on content here over the last couple of years and that there seems to be basically no true "customer appreciation" outside of advertisements in the form of so-called "customer appreciation sales" greatly annoys me. I may still have to buy things here but in my heart I hope there will be competition to this type of business model that won't follow this type of fake pure-business friendliness.

Reality sends a Luxrender scene file - that would, I believe, be an exported format and not affected by encryption. I'm completely unfamiliar with octane but would iamgine any remote/network render system with that would be safe in the same way. I'm not sure how you are getting files into Poser - Poser-format content is not encrypted, and OBJ (or CR2) export from DS would be unaffected.

gregbo · January 2016

timmins.william said:

You can't simultanously claim that encryption has been instituted to cut down on casual piracy AND state that it's not really DRM.

I mean, obviously, you can, but it really makes Daz look bad.

++++++++++++++++1

TesseractSpace · January 2016

DAZ_Spooky said:

TesseractSpace said:

So they're now admitting it's DRM.

It has been there the whole time, though it was reworded (slightly) right after the first Beta release. It has been referenced many times, in many threads, including this one.

So I am confused by your statement. Am I misunderstanding your implication?

I was refering back to DAZ_Rawb's attempt at telling us why the DRM wasnt DRM.

Spit · January 2016

I'm alright with encryption but I'm NOT alright with my lack of choice in handling my files. I CANT WORK with my hands tied.

Now I feel misled by DAZ_Jon's answer to my question about why the files are set up the way they are now. He tried to make us believe that the info he gave was the reason for doing it when the real reason was control over the files. Doesn't give me a good feeling at all about any of it.

'Look, if we do it this way we can tell the dummies how great the new Smart Content features are--it'll feel like a teaspoon of sugar. Bwa Hah'.

I've been a customer since the beginning almost twenty years ago but I no longer trust DAZ.

TesseractSpace · January 2016

j cade said:

nicstt said:

Content creators, could get access to unlocked Daz, just like they get access to HD morphs.

Except that that would mean there could be no new vendors, Daz likes new vendors. Mo' Vendors. Mo' Moneys.

If they go walled garden as it is increasingly looking like they will, they can get new vendors anytime they want by recruiting from people making 3d content for Poser and other programs. Locking out the hoi polloi doesn't prevent them from going out to cherrypick the talent when they want.

Richard Haseltine · January 2016

Spit said:

I'm alright with encryption but I'm NOT alright with my lack of choice in handling my files. I CANT WORK with my hands tied.

Now I feel misled by DAZ_Jon's answer to my question about why the files are set up the way they are now. He tried to make us believe that the info he gave was the reason for doing it when the real reason was control over the files. Doesn't give me a good feeling at all about any of it.

'Look, if we do it this way we can tell the dummies how great the new Smart Content features are--it'll feel like a teaspoon of sugar. Bwa Hah'.

I've been a customer since the beginning almost twenty years ago but I no longer trust DAZ.

The Connect directory structure is designed to address two issues is the message I took - it simplifies things, at least from a new uer's perspective, and it eliminates potential conflicts. I don't see a clash between the replies, they were just highlighting different benefits.

Tigerschnecke · January 2016

Richard Haseltine said:

-

Tigerschnecke said:

I am still worried that my workflow will be seriously compromised by this move toward encryption-only content. My main machine to control all the content (and do non 3D-related work) is my laptop. However, it dramatically overheats if I try to use IRAY, and it is not intended to run it. Instead, like a previous poster, I use Dropbox to synchronize my content libraries with a desktop machine that has a powerful graphics card as well as a license for Octance Render via the Poser plugin (I do not have a license for DAZ Studio for Octane). However, I actually far more frequently use Luxrender via the Reality plugin for which I use yet another machine in my office to render (usually overnight) sets of images via 4 connected nodes.

I.e., I have so far been able to use my main work machine to set things up, have all materials autosynchronize via Dropbox to both the desktop (for Octane), and the other machine (actually another laptop) to play the master for the luxrender nodes. Finally, I use the desktop machine to host the rendering of Poser versions of the same sets of images via the Queue manager. I.e., I typically set things up on my main laptop (that I also take home, from where things are connected to the office via VPN and tight VNC) and outsource all the actual rendering. This has been a good workflow for me, since I need to create a very narrow range of images but these need to be the best possible quality that I can manage. The different rendering engines have different strengths (and some things I still fail to manage in Luxrender) - so what I do in the end is to create difference images in Photoshop and then blending everything together again from the different source images to create the final images after a lot of filtering etc. Nevertheless, I need to be able to open content from different machines as well as synchronize an accessible library via Dropbox - eventhough I am actually only working on one copy at a time.

In addition to having a lot of potential to screw up my workflow, encrypted resources seem a lot less valuable to me overall and a likely pain and cause of headaches to use. I may still be buying some but if given the choice, unencrypted is worth significantly more to me (and I will be willing to pay much less for encrypted content). E.g., I only recently bought a license for the Adobe Creative Master Suite CS6 since I would rather have a slightly outdated version of the software for which I own an actual time-unlimited license than even a discounted monthly fee.

Finally, I find it very unfriendly of DAZ to sneak into delivering encryption-only content the way they are doing it. I have literally been spending thousands of dollars on content here over the last couple of years and that there seems to be basically no true "customer appreciation" outside of advertisements in the form of so-called "customer appreciation sales" greatly annoys me. I may still have to buy things here but in my heart I hope there will be competition to this type of business model that won't follow this type of fake pure-business friendliness.

Reality sends a Luxrender scene file - that would, I believe, be an exported format and not affected by encryption. I'm completely unfamiliar with octane but would iamgine any remote/network render system with that would be safe in the same way. I'm not sure how you are getting files into Poser - Poser-format content is not encrypted, and OBJ (or CR2) export from DS would be unaffected.

I use DSON-importer for Poser (Genesis 1, 2), as well as D3D's DSON-loader script. As concerns Luxrender, perhaps that would still work - although I always check texture collection since otherwise I have gotten errors (white textures) from the samples rendered by the nodes. I am not sure if the textures are part of the encryption or not. But in any case, I need to switch as seamlessly as possible between at least two machines (I actually have 2 licences for Poser 2014, and 3 licenses for Reality 4 [2 x Poser, 1x DAZ, + 1 older reality 2 license for DAZ, etc.), as well as another license for Poser 2012 installed on the other laptop to be able to check on things there.

Perhaps the encrypted-content would still work as long as I stay in DAZ studio but reading the types of error messages other users appear to get who don't have a workflow like that suggests that it could be a lot of trouble. In particular since there is no way of telling how this will continue in the future.

SassyWench · January 2016

Spit said:

I'm alright with encryption but I'm NOT alright with my lack of choice in handling my files. I CANT WORK with my hands tied.

Now I feel misled by DAZ_Jon's answer to my question about why the files are set up the way they are now. He tried to make us believe that the info he gave was the reason for doing it when the real reason was control over the files. Doesn't give me a good feeling at all about any of it.

'Look, if we do it this way we can tell the dummies how great the new Smart Content features are--it'll feel like a teaspoon of sugar. Bwa Hah'.

I've been a customer since the beginning almost twenty years ago but I no longer trust DAZ.

You're not alone Spit. This is all really distressing to me.

j cade · January 2016

TesseractSpace said:

j cade said:

nicstt said:

Content creators, could get access to unlocked Daz, just like they get access to HD morphs.

Except that that would mean there could be no new vendors, Daz likes new vendors. Mo' Vendors. Mo' Moneys.

If they go walled garden as it is increasingly looking like they will, they can get new vendors anytime they want by recruiting from people making 3d content for Poser and other programs. Locking out the hoi polloi doesn't prevent them from going out to cherrypick the talent when they want.

Except that is a much smaller pool of potential vendors, who would be currently using a different program. So it would make no sense.

Notifications

No encrypted for me.

Comments

Adding to Cart…