N00b question: what can I do with only Bryce and no add-ons?
Hylas
Posts: 5,026
So, I'm considering getting Bryce just for fun.
Can someone give me a rough idea of what I can (and can't) do with the base application and no add-on?
Is it like with DAZ Studio, where you have to buy a bunch of content first in order to get a halfway decent result?
Or does the base application already come with a decent chunk of content?
Also, is it easy to export Bryce landscapes in a format that can be used in DAZ Studio?
Thanks!
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
Hylas - Bryce was there before Studio, Poser, Carrara and hence a 3D tool that can be used without any additional purchases if you want to do landscapes, forests, underwater, sci-fi, abstracts ... except people, beast or vehicles (though you can create them, but it's not very simple). It is a very versatile tool.
With Bryce you get a couple of additional assets, even HDRIs. You can export terrains as objects in different resolutions to use in other 3D applications and you can also import objects like people and beast from Studio and other applications. There is a bridge between Studio and Bryce but I'm not sure how good it still works with the newest Studio. However, you can (as I do) export as Wavefront OBJ from Studio or other applications and import them into Bryce, and vice versa. The caveat is that the materials that come over are not always very good and need some adjustments on either side.
Materials are texture based (extremely versatile) but picture based shaders can also be used, though it is a bit limited. If exporting from Bryce, texture based materials (or shaders) are exported as pictures and the result is not always satisfactory. But then, you have to adjust materials almost always when you use a different render engine (3DS, Iray, Octane, ...).
Bryce has 2 different render engines that handle materials the same. Both are true raytracers - not pathtracers - and work only with the CPU (no GPU). The number of CPU cores/threads used to render can be adjusted (low, normal, high) and you can render over a home network.
I could go on and on - do not hesitate to ask questions.
Thanks, @Horo.
What's the difference between texture based and picture based?
I only know map-based and procedural.
Darn! I tried to remember the names, now you use them. OK! Texture based means procedural and picture based map-based.
As you can use both in Bryce, map-based could be good for objects that are very close to camera, while procedural are very efficient for those afar.
Though also as Horo says, procedural materials in Bryce are more versalite as you can change many different options that impact the look.
Map-based might be better choosen for when you can't get best results from procedural (like images with unique decorations).
There are Texture maps which are usually UV mapped to a model outside of Bryce but set up in the Material lab.. There are procedural textures which are made in the DTE and the material are set up in the Material Lab. Then there are picture objects that are usually placed on a 2D faces with an alpha map to create transparency where the color is not needed. Here is a 2D picture set up on a 2D face with an alpha channel to create the transparency. ( this short animation took about100 2D pictures setting keyframe from the first one to the last one, on the same 2D face.
Comet
Yes Bryce does come with many preset libraries of Objects, Materials, & skies. It also has the tool sets that let you create customs terrains, rocks, trees, all the primitives objects & light rigs, custom materials & skies. There are labs for making Terrains, Materials , Lights settings, Sky settings. Even an animation lab. There are many different ways to duplicate replicate & instance objects and model in Bryce.. It has an excellent edit tool set & one of the best procedural texture labs ever (IMO) & great rendering options to boot. Although Bryce can render realistic still life's, it's primary function are landscapes. IMO for the price you can not go wrong. It's major down fall is it has not been updated for about a decade. Runs on windows well just not compatible with new versions of Mac.OS. I'm not a Srudio user so can't coment there.
As for Studio, it's the other way around.
You can anything from Studio into Bryce (though it's recommended to unassign some materials that will not be used by Bryce, and maybe also resize them; or just remove if you gonna do your own in bryce procedurals). You can also bring some stuff from Bryce to DS, but not everything would give estimated results.
Concerning updates: the bright side is that no new bugs were introduced
. Being still a 32 bit applications limits the size to 2 GB - except when you make it Large Address Aware (free tool available at the Internet see video
you can go to around 3.2 GB if your computer sports at least 4 GB memory.
Bryce 7 is good for those who want to quickly make sci-fi landscapes without many trees or complex clouds, and who can't afford the likes of Vue or the time needed to learn Blender. It has loads of free content, and can import more with a copy of Daz Studio installed. For quick water look at the Flood 2 Photoshop plugin, and for added clouds in Photoshop just paste in a picture of real clouds and blend. Definitely fun for $20, and especially if you want to overpaint the rendered landscape in 2D painting software. But don't expect too much.
Hm... so Bryce can't generate its own clouds, the way it can (AFAIK) generate hills and mountains?
Of course Bryce has clouds, check the skylab, and you can change the texture too.
Bryce is very versatile, doodle and have fun
You can do a great deal with Bryce without buying any additional content or other add-ons at all. Those of us who are, ahem, a little older remember a time when Bryce was practically all there was, at least for hobbyists with relatively low-end computers. A number of very talented artists did some amazing stuff using Bryce alone.
Bryce was originally designed for creating 3D landscapes, so it does that very well. Look for work by Horo, David Brinnen or Estevez to get an idea of what a really skilled user can do in the way of landscape scenes with Bryce.
It doesn't have the same kind of solid object modeling tools that you find in other 3D apps, but a lot of early Bryce users used to use the 'terrain' and symmetric lattice objects in Bryce to sculpt arbitrary objects. I remember some pieces by Kano that pushed this technique pretty much to the limits: see, for example, their Time for Ceremony. Kano also did a spectacular H.R. Giger-style motorbike, but I can't find that one online anywhere.
I've seen some beautiful abstracts done using Bryce. Bryan Smith's Thinkpieces were early favorites of mine, but sadly they don't seem to be online anywhere.
If you want a slightly more conventional app, you could look at Carrara, which is often on sale and which has some additional tools for modeling. Carrara can also do landscapes, although I don't think it has quite the same richness and range as Bryce in that respect. (Aside: I love Carrara to distraction, but if I were picking up a new app today, I'd probably learn Blender instead, as it's free and under active development).
If you have a chance to get Bryce for a modest price, you should definitely give it a try (and if you don't like the price, just wait; you'll probably get a chance to pick it up for less sooner or later). Part of the fun of Bryce is pushing past the limitations.
One warning: neither Bryce nor Carrara are under active development or maintenance at the moment. They should still work fairly well on Windows; they are more problematic on MacOS, and will not run on recent versions of the OS. DAZ3D have never given a definitive answer to questions about whether there will or won't be future versions of either, but it seems probable that both are essentially "abandonware". If you're comfortable with that, fine, but you should be aware that what you see today is probably all you'll ever get.
Bryce is fantastic!
I use bryce all the time, you can make what ever you want or what ever your imagination can come up with. I used it back in the days when the AGP 16mb Voodoo cards ruled the market.
I use it on a low budget laptop, it does not require a super computer to run and renders are acceptable for just passing the time, or coming up with new ideas.
You can merge and cut objects, blocks to build alsorts, then export them to be used in Daz Studio. I find this best when wanting to make somthing thats not available.
You should deffiently download it and use it.
pictures attached are all made using Bryce stock install.
Nice modelling! Thanks for sharing experience.
Another Bryce Fans - glad to see you. And, beautiful modeling.
I have been a big bryce fan for over twenty years, its just the last four years, life has been busy.
Some of you may remember the racing track work I did, all made using bryce, I have included the screen shots, bryce is so under rated. The modeling work that can be done is easy and fun.
Long live Bryce
Wow Alpha01 awesome modeling, thanks for sharing
Thanks everyone, I appreciate all the answers.
I did buy Bryce a few days ago when I had the opportunity to get it for a decent price. Currently I'm having problems installing some of the content, but I'm also doing a 100 things at the same time so maybe I just have to look at it again. Or I will be back with questions :)
I have no plans to use Bryce for modelling; I intend to create and render landscapes. But it's impressive to see what some folks can achieve!
Alpha01 - great models. Indeed, the possibilities to model in Bryce is underrated, though it also depends how you prefer to work.
For me, when you model using bryce, the work it takes to create something may take longer to build then the likes of CAD, Carrara ot Hexagon.
But it makes the renders look better in shading, shadows and orientation in placement within a scene. For example, when creating the barriers in the "Pit Land Scene" on the edge of the race track. They project in and at any angle, as they are created like they would be in real life. A light that shines in the render at any angle will cast a shadow onto the barriers and shade them appropriately as well as the cast of light around them as solid objects. Also if the object meterials was of a reflective or mirrored texture, it will shine and mirror accordingly to the angle of light projected.
The benefit of this is that you can place a camera in, around, near or even through the barriers at any angle and the barriers will look real, cast a shadow, bend light and reflect images from the viewpoint.
The disadvantages is that it takes longer to make and can slow everything down.
Dont get me wrong, I like the software Carrara and Hexagon, but in some models (like for example "Guns") the grooves and indentations of the model is dsiplayed as an image in the texture, this is only a problem when you do a close up shot and the light does not cast as it should around the model.
But its like you say "It depends how you prefer to work"
Here is the close up image of what I am saying.
As the light casts the shadow on the objects, it bends with the object as everything is made as its ment to be in real life. The scaffolding even has joints visable, the shadow is displayed on the railings, through and bends on the armco. The light on the railings is shining aroundand through the bars and the shadow on the armco and track is cast to angle.
I think in todays world with the power of computers becoming as they are. More modellers and designers should be doing the finer details of 3D artwork. So artists can do super close ups of models and renders.