I was asked to do some side by side close-ups of the default textures on the Sixus1 figures vs. the effect with the real skin shader script. I used default poser lighting for all of the renders. For the real skin shader I didn't change any of the values, but I unchecked the add noise bumps and displacement options. In order to get the real skin shader effect on some of the figures, I had to copy their maps over to another figure and then copy them back.

What, no bigfoot? ;) I'd be interested in seeing them with the displacement options, if you get a chance.

Is this a dumb question? Is there a problem with Face to body to hand scale using this shader?

BTW, do you need me to show all of them with the displacement option or does the Adam2 image give you the idea?

Behemoth looks good like that :) --Rebekah--

Wow, the skin shader IS good. I prefer without the bump/displacement personoally. I think this is due to the fact that there is no subsurface scattering actually occuring making the skin look more like it's made of rock than of something partially transluscent.

Papa, 1) are you using the latest release of the shader? I just got an email today saying there is a new version. 2) i assume you are using the default poser lights so others can somehow compare?? Because the default poser lights are awful on closeup portraits like this. i have found the finest results with the Shader under pure white lights. 3) can you talk about bump maps used above? is there a bump map in place on all the renders and how did you create the bump maps? Thank you for the work involved in this thread. :::: Opera :::::

The A2 gives me the idea, that's fine. Looks pretty good -- I may have to get the shader set.

Opera: 1) I am using the 12/29/04 release of the shader. Last I heard, the shader had been fully updated from the hyperreal products and was still in testing. 2) The default lights suck, but it gives you the idea of an out of the box render just so you can compare how the shader is using the lighting. 3) There were no bump maps used in any of the posts except for the Adam2 with displacement. When you don't have a bump map, the shader gives you the option of adding noise to the bump node. I typically avoid doing this as I don't like the effects of either the shader's noise or displacement.

PBM - this is an excellent comparison. There is a new release - available a day or so ago. Maybe you have a spam filter I your email? I emailed all purchases about the update, and got a flood of bounces - asking me to register with their spam filter b4 the email would be sent thru, which I politely declined. Some comments on the results you got....they are great...although using the default settings in HER and HIM seemed to overexpose the highlights. This is now all adjustable on the update. Also, the new script plugs the texturemap into the bump if there is no bump map (instead of plugging in the noise node). I agree with you, I wasn't a huge fan of the noise node. I do like the displacement tho. Default lighting: I think the RSS gives a pretty good result with the default lighting...and I wonder if a tougher test would be with all white lights - 1 near the camera (main light) at 80%, and 1 either side at around 40%. If you are having problems with running the shader on any of the figures - let me know - I can give you the change to code the extra material names into the script (also check the FAQ). You may find the updated version already works with a couple more figures. And momodot...I would have thought the relative map size differences between the head and body would have impacted the spots - but it doesn't! (and I don't know why!).

Hey Papa, I've got your new Adam.obj for you. Everyone else will have to wait until tomorrow since I will have to update the CR2 and MAT poses also. --Rebekah-- I'll send a link to your email.

thanks rebekah :)

Eeek....don't you ever throw anything way ???? That poor ol' fairy is soooo old. :( Reminds me that we should make a new one some time :) --Rebekah--

Rebekah, will the new obj have any effect on the morph Cath is working on?

LOL... I thought I was doing pretty good about cleaning out my runtime, but I guess not ;)

Nope, only added a new material, won't cause any problems at all. :) --Rebekah--

Further to my post above....the 'Lil Centaur is a good example of the specular not being quite spot on with the old RSS - would be interested to see what he (she?) looks like with the new version.

I have been seriously considering this but no one I know has so many spots on their faces, is there a way to remove those spots?

Move the Large, Small and Fresnel spots slider to the left - and all the spots are gone.

Hmm... well I haven't received an email about the update to Real Skin Shader. But good to know there is one available :)

I may do a repost in another thread with optimized effects for each figure. I'm still playing with the new settings on the script :)

I've been playing with the shader. This time I'm a lot more hesitant about merely copying the effect from one figure to another. If the script could run on the materials "skin," "head," and "body" that would cover just about all of the Sixus1 figures. Is there a way to edit?

What these dots are making me think is that the shader would be good for ceramic bowls et. Is there away to deal with the scale of different body parts using the Python script (which I intend to buy on my next shopping trip)? How does one mask the palms etc?

PBM, to add other materials, edit the RealSkinShader.py script, and look for the line....
if material.Name() in ["SkinBody", "SkinTorso", ....etc

Simply add "skin", "head", and "body" to the list. Make a back-up of the script first.

momodot, using it for cermic bowls is possible, although you need to do 2 things (and this will probably all be too much trouble)....

1. Convert the ceramic bowl from a prop to a figure (load the prop, go into the Setup Room, click the Create Bone tool, drag the tool to create a small bone in the middle of the prop, rename the bone to "hip", click the Grouping tool, click the "Auto Group" button, go back to the pose room)

2. Edit the script as described to PBM in this msg to add the material names of the bowl....

I'll be away from the PC for a couple of weeks from tomorrow, so unfortuantely cannot contribute further to this thread. Good luck.

Hey, put that Lilin away....the new Lilin comes out this weekend :) --Rebekah-- Neat shader, everyone is spotty like me ;p

Thanks for the update Rebekah. The new Lilin looks great. Just thought I'd demonstrate what the shader can do :)

I edited the shader and from my experience the material zone names are case sensitive so if you have a figure that uses the material "Skin" on one figure it may not run on a figure with "skin." I have some demonstration images with 2 white lights just showing some different effects you can get.

I'm not saying my options are the best, but I hope they give you a good idea as to what you can do...

Great comparison PBM. Behemeth and Brit look great using defaults. I think HIM and HER look a bit shiney with the defaults and need a lower skin highlighting power (maybe they don't come with bump maps?). Jabba looks great.

None of the Project Human characters come with any bump maps as far as I've been able to find. I was a bit too lazy to put Cath's (Mec4D) spot bumping on them using the P5 shader. I just wanted to show out of the box vs. real skin shader. BTW, I finally figured out how to edit the script so that it works on Sixus1 figures, Elle, and Misaki. The added material zones are case-sensitive...

The original RSS used spot bumping if there was no bump map. After looking at the many renders using the product, it became pretty clear that it was a poor option, so the new version plugs the texturemap into the bump and does away with the spots method. When the script uses the texturemap for bump, you probably should turn up the bump value (which might help HIM and HER).

Actually I tried that and what I got was little black marks on the face even when all the spots were set at the lowest value. I found that I couldn't go above 0.02 for those 2 figures.

Interesting. Is it possible the black mark were your min displacement bounds? Maybe the granite displacement + increased bump interfered with the bounds. Increasing the displacement bounds in the render settings usually gets rid of this.

I don't know. I had left the granite displacement at 0.01 the whole time. That's a setting I really haven't taken the time to play with yet...