I am currently using another renderer with quite a lot of Australian plants, and cannot achieve the same results in D5 until more are added to the library:
Why not consider just buying those assets yourself if they’re what you need? While D5 does have a fairly diverse asset library, it cannot possibly accommodate every project. It is up to the user/artist to fill in those gaps.
It should be relatively simple and lucrative to add heavily-used plants from various parts of the world. It’s not like I’m asking for a blue Datsun 120Y with red racing stripes, - a few Eucalypts, Acacias, etc. as a starting point, much like the ever-present Japanese Maple.
It certainly would be a lot more convenient if more diverse species of tree assets were in the library currently, but realistically, making high quality foliage assets takes considerable time and is no simple task. Especially when they need to be regional specific. There are a multitude of libraries that already exist like the ones you shared that users can acquire and import themselves. D5 would likely have to work out special licensing permissions if they were to use third-party libraries, which may not provide any revenue or benefit. I’m not sure if it is fair to expect the cost, time, or effort, to be incurred onto the D5 development team especially when the software is essentially free and likely other matters are a higher priority.
You said you have been using another rendering software that has such trees? Why not port them over to D5 since they suit your project’s needs?
It’s Lumion with proprietary plants built in SpeedTree.
Importing those models from a different format is incredibly inefficient when I’m working on a property that is 9 hectares. Plants in particular need to be optimised for the software because of the organic nature and high poly count.
I have bought quite a substantiate amount of oceania trees from globalplants, and once imported them and saved into my local assets library, i used again and again no dramas at all, and i find it highly efficient, when i worked on a huge and highly specific species from Landscape guys. No i am not associated with GP.
It’s not that anyone is against it, it’s that for some reason there’s an expectation for the D5 team to spoon-feed users with assets and resources when they already exist or obtainable elsewhere. If someone already has paid for a foliage 3D library, they should have the technical know-how of using it and also converting it for their own use, regardless of rendering pipeline. 3D formats are standardized enough (PBR workflows, etc) that this isn’t difficult, just time consuming.
IMO, one of D5’s biggest strengths is its landscaping functionality. Without it, I wouldn’t ever touch it, and it’s the sole reason I subscribe to the Pro tier or whatever they call it. So in a sense, I suppose I do expect some spoon-feeding, because D5 has a lot of things that can make it challenging to incorporate into my workflow. I can better appreciate your perspective if someone was lamenting a very specific plant, but lacking a complete “biome” is frustrating, yes.