I wonder, how difficult is it to have a update button? Like sverchok or archipack etc. Would help a lot 
Nopeā¦
When running projects that take a bit of time, you donāt want to have that option.
Also, in a studio environment, updates are on a strict - āonly installed if update fixes bugsā - regime.
This is the same for Blender, auto updates would wreak havoc hereā¦ 
Thereās a reason why thereās a LTS version these daysā¦ Stability.
1 Like
Sorry for the confusion. I probably shouldnāt have used the name āLTSā as this has nothing to do with Blenderās 2.83 LTS version. What I meant with Version 3.6 is LTS, is that itās stable, and will potentially get bugfixes if any major issue is reported. 3.6.6 is the latest and most stable version of 3.6 that includes bug fixes, so Iāll recommend this one.
As you could see with 3.7, I have been updating the UI and breaking previous presets, so if you are in the middle of a production, stick to the 3.6. Any important bugfix will be ported back to 3.6 if necessary.
All versions support 2.8x and 2.9x. If compatibility breaks with the new 2.9x versions, Photographer 3.6 will get an update.
I agree, I looked into it but ran into issues because itās not that easy when using a private repository. I need to check how other paid add-on did it.
3 Likes
Hi its me from the Youtube Comment Section!
Support for Animation Rendermanagement with the following features, based on what the addon already has:
-
A button that lets me tell the camera list, that my camera is for animation or either still image rendering.
-
A Section where I can tell the rendermanager, how long (frame range) a camera should be rendered, aswells as FPS, Framestep.
-
When having multiple cameras set up with markers (bind camera to marker), there could be a button in the camera list, that automatically sets the time range (frame range in the scene) for each individual camera, based on the camera markers you already placed.
-By pressing āRender All Camerasā it now renders all individual cameras with their individual frame ranges. The images are stored in the following folder structure:
BlendFileName (Folder)
----Camera01 (Folder)
--------YYMMDDTT (Folder) -> For each rendersession, it creates a new folder version
----------------Rendered Files (Custom Name)
--------YYMMDDTT (Folder)
--------YYMMDDTT (Folder)
----Camera02 (Folder)
----Camera03 (Folder) -
Option to also store renderpasses in those folders
Alright, Iām tired its 3 AM, i hope this all makes sense LOL
Photographer is a great addon, worth buying.
Thanks for the detailed request, there is a lot to think about.
My first thought is that what you want is a proper render manager at this point, and I would personally use Deadline instead. This sounds like it is out of the scope of my add-on, but Iāll see what I can do to improve the Render Queue.
I first need to look into how Blender designed its way to render multiple animations, we have the concept of scenes, we have the concepts of camera markersā¦ I donāt want to be adding something else on top that just adds confusion.
1 Like
Ahh New Blender Asset manager - Well I will stop using the KitOps as an asset library then, and just use it for the functions. Makes so much more sense. Thank you:)
So it seems that there is a need for a decent Light manager, there are quite a few new add-ons that appeared, but none will work with the Physical Lights from Photographer 3. I have to admit that I personally dislike having to use several add-ons that overlap to some degree, just for a couple of features. My add-on is growing past its original Camera settings purpose, so I wanted to check if there is an actual ask for it.
There are two ways I can think of:
- a simple Light list, included in Photographer, with intensity and colors, solo and mute.
- a more advanced add-on dedicated to Lighting, which would cost a few bucks but which would grow to ultimately become the best Light add-on out there, like Photographer aimed at being the best Camera add-on. There are already some great add-ons like Gaffer or Lumiere, and it will take time to catch up with their feature set.
Do you want a Light Manager compatible with Photographer?
- Yes, simple as part of Photographer
- Yes, advanced as a separate add-on ($)
- No, I donāt need it
0 voters
Note: The result of this poll is not binding to anything, what happens in the end will depend on many more factors. 
If you have any other suggestion, feel free to write them in the thread.
7 Likes
Perhaps two versions - one that ships within photographer and is lite in features, as you mentioned simply as a list with an option to turn off and on for those who would prefer to have just the current camera settings without light options.
And a paid version with a full feature set for those who would like to have complete control of the light environment.
This way all 3 interested sides will have an option to choose, those who donāt need it, those who want simple options and those who want full control.
This might open a bit more work for you but in the end you covered all target groups.
Mind you this is just a personal opinion. In the end I am buying whatever you put on the market.
4 Likes
I love your work, i would love ur new lighting addon. And i want to contribute more $ to people like u:)
Good luck!
Photographer add-on has become an essential add-on for my workflow and Iām using it with Gaffer, but itās not enough. I canāt wait for your new Light Manager!
1 Like
Working on it! Whatās missing from Gaffer in your opinion?
Apart the all the physical radiometry stuff, Gaffer lacks the ability to switch from one solo-mode to another in one single click.
1 Like
I didnāt expect such results from the poll actually, I am happy to see there is a need for a better light add-on but Iām hitting a problem.
- A new Light add-on, letās call it Lightsource, would need to have the physical light features like Photographer to work on its own.
- Photographer already has these featuresā¦
- There will be unnecessary redundancy and possible conflicts between the two add-ons, unless I remove physical lights from Photographer and let it be solely a Camera add-on.
I would like to do that separation: Photographer is for cameras, Lightsource is for lights. Itās probably less confusing.
But if I decide to remove physical lights from Photographer, customers wonāt be happy for sure, so I would provide the new Lightsource for free to fix that. Then, whatās the point in making a new add-on entirely, instead of a free Photographer update?
The products purposes would be clearer, easier to code for me, but you will have to deal with two different add-ons and updates, which I assume is less than ideal.
Another option is to release it as part of Photographer 4, which would be a paid update, but since paid updates isnāt something that is very common in the Blender add-on ecosystem, I also think Iāll get flak for it, even if itās a few bucks and people are paying way more for add-ons that do way less.
So Iām a bit torn with how to proceed with it. In the meantime Iām still coding and itās going well at least
8 Likes
I find your addon valuable enough and at least at this time you seem dedicated enough to maintain it that I wouldnāt mind paying for an upgrade or paying for a separate Lightsource. Matter of fact, if it was just a few bucks, Iād be happy to cover upgrades for 5-10 people depending on the exact cost.
3 Likes
Personally, I have no problem paying for an update. And even if some donāt want to see it, I see the most sensible option as Photographer 4 at a higher price and a smaller premium for those who already have Photographer 3. Anyway, I find 2 addons unnecessary.
Since Blender 2.8, add-ons have reached other price categories, so no one can really complain about Photograher. 
5 Likes
I donāt like the idea of having to update two separate addons, so the paid update sounds a lot better to me 
Iād even buy Photographer 4 as a new user just to support your work
3 Likes
You must have an incredibly tight setup to dislike updating two addonsā¦that made me check my addon directory and Iām kind of shocked to see I have 44 in there
1 Like
Hehehe yeah, I have a lot of addons installed, and updating them one by one can get pretty annoying, especially if youāre also constantly jumping between different blender versions. 
I hear you, maybe do a new setup, like scatter did, with one ordinary addon and a pro addon.
Let us who have photograph already pay a fee to upgrade to the pro. I would not mind at all. U got to get paid. Also, super nice to have it all in one package, u are probably right!
Good luck!
I too think that the best would be Photographer 4. Your pricing has being very reasonable and I think a discount code or an upgrade somehow for current customers could work. Example is Fluent which has a Power Trip version.
1 Like