Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.Daz 3D is part of
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
If I had to guess, if they implemented that anad and a new driver was released that didn't cause any issues, they'd have to create a new version of DAZ Studio to reflect that, and they'd have to generate new versions just to update that message.
I would suggest, instead, that maybe creating an entry on the software requirements page that reflects what drivers are working for different versions of the software might be more easily implemented.
I thought that was what the Check GPU Driver Version checkbox at the bottom of the Advanced tab of Render Settings did - though I usually check and if need be update the driver before running the new version so I haven't been able to do a real test for a while.
Never used it (as I'm on a Mac) but does it advise you of a newer version of a compatible driver that was released after the software was released, or continually track newer drivers as time goes on?
Why would it do that? It only needs to check that the driver is recent enough for the version of DS used. Updating drivers just because there are newer ones available, is asking for trouble.
I thought it fetched the current driver version and compared it to the Iray requirement, but I am not certain of that.
The folloeing products produce a purple screen with Iray Sky rendering.
Easy Environments Exoplanet 1,5,6,8. Easy environments Frozen Lake, Winter II, Witchcraft, First Light and Green Hills.
I've put two tickets in so far, the first on 11/1. What is going on with this?
Windows 10 64, Geforce 2070 Super card with 546.17 drivers.
Richard said:
"That great a difference sounds as if you need to update your drivers, certainly if it is a general situation - if it's justa few scenes affected that way it may be that they just barely fitted into the GPU before and now don't fit at all."
Thank you for your reply, Richard! You always give me excellent advice and are extremely helpful. I apprecaite you very much.
I am using the nvidia studio driver, 546.01-desktop-win10-win11-64bit-international-nsd-dch-whql.exe (the latest one to date), with Studio 4.22.0.1 Pro Edition (64-bit) public build on a reasonably high-powered windows 10 box with an Nvidia RTX 4070. The scene consisted of a single Genesis 8.1 female with nothing else. I rendered it at 2560 x 8192. I had plenty of nvidia ram; it did not come close to filling it. But the scene included one of the most realisitc hair props I have found, hoku hair (https://www.daz3d.com/hoku-hair-for-genesis-8-and-81). With that hair, the scene tookl 1hr 50min to render. When I tried it without the hair it took 6 minutes.
Is there something wrong here or is this what I should expect?
Then I used another realistic hair prop, https://www.daz3d.com/dforce-nirv-straight-long-hair-for-genesis-8-and-genesis-81-females. Then it took 15 minutes to render.
What would make the hoku hair render much more slowly than the nirvana hair? They have similar realism.
At any rate. I do not believe the new 4.22.0.1 studio release is to blame here -- at least not by itself.
That is a sign of running out of VRAM on your GPU.
Some VRAM on your GPU would have been used, that was the baseload by Windows, DS and the scene plus how much the geometry of the scene took, but when DS has started loading the textures into VRAM, it said "No can do" and dropped to CPU.
The amount of VRAM for the baseload and geometry is not released before the rendering is done.
This is a known issue, due to a chnage in the library Iray is using for image handling. The PA has resaved the .exr files and sent them in as an update, you can wait fro that or you can resave them (still as .exr) yourself if you have a suitable image editor.
There are a fairly large number of users on the forum who are constantly being told to dial back their driver to an earlier version. I have no idea why they have a newer driver than is recommended, but it happens; new card, new computer? Trying a new driver for all the wonderful new features that are offered for a game they play?
You're right though, people shouldn't update their drivers for their video card if it works with DAZ Studio, regardless of whatever else they might use their computer for, they're just askng for trouble.
Installing new drivers does not mean the new drivers can't have bugs, or even that they are faster than the older ones - Updating drivers is always a gamble, if the drivers one is using are working without glitches in programs one uses, there is no reason to update, at least not amongst the first ones. Let the impatient ones find the bugs and problems first.
I agree 100%! I haven't updated my Nvidia driver since 2015 and haven't had a single iRay problem in over eight years.
And you can use dForce with the same driver?
Oh heck no! My apologies, I was being semi-facetious. I did install an Nvidia driver on my 2012 iMac with an Nvidia chip back in 2015 and tested iRay with that card at the time. I decided to stick with 3DL and OpenGL (and someday, Filament with DAZ Studio 5). iRay is very impressive and the things people are doing with it here are nothing short of amazing, but it's just not for me.
I'd started out with what I thought was a reason why it might not work to have a dialog box pop up regarding drivers that might be newer than is being used but still be compatible as drivers improve, and when asked why anyone would update their driver if the one they had worked and I listed a few examples of why that might be.
Again, my apologies for interrupting more serious discussions with my last, more frivolous comment, I'll step back.
>limit is now 25k samples.
this update is only for face transfer 2, i want a iray update please.
That will probably, based on their comments for this round, appear when Daz is confident that it will not cause new issues, or in the next full dot version (or full version) after that - so pesumably 4.23.0.1 or later. Though this update does address a number of other areas - see https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/comment/8473431/#Comment_8473431
I find this claim rather dubious when things like autofitting Genesis 1 have been broken by this same beta.
It is after all, a BETA. And Iray has broken plenty of things already, like the purple renders. Perhaps, just perhaps, Iray 2023 fixes some of these things that people are freaking out about. But we will never know because Daz refuses to let us even BETA test it in their BETA...something that BETAs are supposed to be for...testing BETA features. BETA features in BETA software, what a novel idea.
Where in the world was that ever said besides now? If you are using the Beta you have to report those issues the proper way by submitting a ticket and not here in the forums, to be fixed. They are released as Beta's for people to find those issues because it's physically impossible to test every single function and system configuration for the Alpha team. If people don't want to participate in testing it then you just don't download it. If you do want to test the new features and see if it will hold up to how you use it then install it and do as with any Beta version anywhere and report the issues so they can be looked at.
That has been reported.
a beta for an updated build - x.x.x.1 to x.x.x.7 - not anything more. Though I admit adding a new plug-in may seem to confuse the issue, but plug-ins like face transfer 2 are, I think, additional to the core features while iray, though implemented as a plug-in, is a core feature.
If you are referring to "Render Settings[pane]/Editor[tab]/Progressive Rendering[Sub-pane]/max Samples[entry]" the limit is now infinity (unlimited). Here's a picture of the actual parameter settings inm 4.22.0.7 (the menu has been restored using the instructions here: https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/comment/8476011/#Comment_8476011):
EDIT: I updated the picture after a "reset attributes", the previous screen show had my own default (-1). This is what 4.22.0.7 has out-of-the-box. Note that "Reset Attributes" can also be restored to the pane using the instructions above:
The upper limit was, indeed, changed from "15000" to "25000" however the lower limit was also changed from "0" (a really useless value) to "-1" (a value which means unlimited). I always have the limit set to -1 and have since many Y releases (as in X.Y...) ago. "25000" is pretty much as useless as "15000" or, indeed, any other upper limit.
The instructions in the PDF download (Face_Transfer_Activations_Guide.pdf) are wrong, emphasis added:
It's "Face Transfer 2" and, unlike the entry for "Face Transfer" it does now have an unfilled in entry. I accidentally entered the FT license code, after all the instructions do say "Face Transfer" not "FT2" and the serial numbers in my account are widely separated. Anyway, the new, FT2, field accepted the old (FT) serial number and told me I had to restart. Many minutes later DS managed to produce a main window and I could see the FT code had not stuck. No warning or error messages including in the log file. Search for "face" shows this:
And that's the last "face" in the log file.
It did exactly the same thing with the correct code but this time it worked, somewhat speeded up by using instances (so I don't have to wait for the original DS to shut down before launching a new one to check the installation.)
It's also impossible to add a pane to a sub-window if the sub-window pane bar itself has scroll arrows; the scroll arrows obscure the blank space under the last entry which, so far as I can tell, is the only place where the pop-up has the "add pane..." entry. The work-round is to add the pane to another place (e.g. the timeline horizontal sub-window at the bottom) and drag'n'drop tot the correct place.
There is no "Face Transfer 2" pane, at least not one I could find, so I assume it's the "Face Transfer" pane. The video here:
confirms this (turn the volume off, stop it playing and frame skip to see the "Face Transfer" pane in the bottom right). The FT pane itself has a link to a video, this video:
https://www.daz3d.com/dsportal/4/Video_FaceTransfer
That would be very helpful if it existed... Definately pre-release code. I did a quick test using this image: https://ultimateclassicrock.com/sammy-hagar-festival-cancelled/, which FT2 mis-identified as "Female" (I didn't expect that given that I deliberately selected a hirsute image.) The image is 980x652 (so much larger than the "minimum", I assume FT2 downsamples it.) Instant failure on Generate (with either "Male" or "Female"):
The problem is the "Utilities" directory, which simply does not exist in my installation. I did get, and install, the update to G9SE part 2 a few days ago, and the previous update to both parts 1 and 2. I reloaded DIM and, indeed, installed yet another update of DIM itself. No starter essentials updates are available. I searched my entire installation disk for "Utiltiies", quite a lot of those, but "Genesis 8 Male With Basic Wear" itself could not be found.
So I went to DIM and checked the "installed files" for each part of "Genesis 8 Starter Essentials" (to do this right click on each package in "Installed", select "Show Installed Files...", ^A (select all), ^C (copy) and paste into Notepad so you can search the list, you might consider a better editor than Notepad given the dog's breakfast MS has just made of it.) The only occurence of "Basic" is in "Basic Breast Bridge", there is no occurence of "als.U" (the dot is a single character wildcard; I was using vim.)
On the missing files, did you get the updated content from https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/662091/face-transfer-2#latest ; ?
People aren't reading that thread and keep complaining about this same thing ("missing" files). If the Beta needs a different version of Genesis 9 Starter Essentials files, why isn't there a Beta version of Genesis 9 Starter Essentials in DIM? We are frequently reminded that most customers don't use the forums, so how does Daz expect "most customers" to get the needed files?
No. I also don't install random ZIP files in my DIM managed content directories. True I could hand copy it into one of my non-DIM-managed CMS directories ("LIbrary" for example) but then how on earth would I uninstall it? (PKZip doesn't have "remove all the files in this .zip from this directory" functionality that is readily accessible in Windows; I do know how to do it with Linux.)
I'm just repeating what https://www.daz3d.com/forums/profile/1906654/barbult just said a different way. Ok, it's a beta, but it hasn't received even the most basic testing; the missing files show up immediately and even if a G9 basic is inserted, selected and dialed up with 100% M or 100% F there are still missing files reported for the "skin" (well, not reported, the dialog and hte log file just say that some unknown file(s) can't be opened!)
I would suggest putting it in a separate content directory, then you can unhook that once the main product is updated.
I am talking about the Iray plugin. Your response explains the logical way a beta works, which yes, I agree with completely...that is why I am so frustrated.
But you see, the DS beta is not being used to test Iray. The Iray plugin inside Daz Studio has not changed in a very, very, long time. The Iray plugin in Daz Studio is Iray 2022.1.7, which Daz released on April 24.
When did the Iray 2022.1.7 SDK release? It released on April 21. So Daz released the plugin to the public beta just 3 days after the Iray dev team released it. It would appear that with 3 days, they skipped the private build completely. Hmm.
Then...silence. The Iray dev team continued to release nearly monthly updates all year long, including Iray 2023, which contains many improvements and bug fixes. Iray 2023.0.0 released in JUNE. We heard nothing from Daz. Hmm.
Iray 2023 has received monthly updates ever since, jumping to 2023.0.6.
It goes deeper. The problems that people have been having with Iray predate this version of Iray. Just as one example, Ghost Lights were already dead, and had been dead since the first DS 4.20 released with a much earlier build of Iray. So Daz just suddenly stopped putting new Iray updates into DS...for some reason. Hmm.
Yet the reason given, now on at least two separate occassions by Richard is that the Daz team wants to make sure the new Iray doesn't break anything. "based on their comments for this round, appear when Daz is confident that it will not cause new issues" This statement says a couple things, including the fact that Daz is indeed holding Iray 2023 back. But that really doesn't make sense. After all, just use some logic. The things Iray broke all happened long before Iray 2022.1.7 released. The problems all began way back in Feb 2022. Yet Daz continued releasing updates to Iray for more than an ENTIRE YEAR before suddenly deciding to stop? So why the sudden change in release schedule?
Moreover, Iray 2023 never appeared anywhere in the beta builds, not even private builds. It wasn't until very recently that Iray 2023 showed up in a beta, a private one. Funny enough, Iray 2023.0.6 popped up in the private beta channel at nearly the same time Face Transfer 2 did. Isn't that interesting.
Yet...only Face Transfer 2 has released to the public. And boy, did it sure come out fast. I don't think we need to ask why. But you know, I will anyway. Why was Face Transfer 2 pushed to the public build so fast? I mean, come on, they even put it on pre order, and the first place to actually use it is in the beta of all things. A preorder for a beta??? And yes, I have to ask, because that is extremely strange. If Face Transfer 2 is fine, why isn't it in the full build? What is going on?
So this all brings up some questions. If Daz is waiting to make sure the new Iray doesn't break anything...why hasn't it showed up in the beta before now? When was Daz supposedly testing this? Was it in a secret lab somewhere? How are we the customers supposed to interpret this? Going back to your own description of how a beta works, how are customers supposed to file reports when they don't even have the plugin to test? Thus my frustrated plea to put the plugin in the beta.
Why, if Daz wanted to avoid Iray breaking things, why did they wait an entire year AFTER THOSE THINGS WERE ALREADY BROKEN before deciding to stop updating Iray? How does that make sense? Why didn't they stop at Iray 2022.0.0? Or hell...why didn't they just revert back to Iray 2021??? Oh wait...VDBs were in the store, huh.
And...again, if Daz is playing it safe, how can they claim that when they keep breaking their own stuff with DS itself?
...or otherwise translated into Human :).
Might there be a video some where?
Is it just me that the timeline keys are missing from 4.22.0.7? I mean, I don't see it anywhere.