Hi all,

I've always been a fan of the way some DAZ promo pics come out looking so "vivid" and crisp. They look almost "toonish" ..... but not quite.

Some examples are :

http://www.daz3d.com/i.x/shop/itemdetails/-/?item=4951&cat=350
http://www.daz3d.com/i.x/shop/itemdetails/-/?item=4954&cat=350
http://www.daz3d.com/i.x/shop/itemdetails/-/?item=5054&cat=350

I realise that backgrounds can play a role, and also an appropriate skin shader. I think its the lighting combinations that escape me.

I've not been able reproduce this and was wondering if anyone could share some tips on how to achieve this effect (or similar).

Thanks in advance.
 
regards,
Andrew

Have you ever tried one of face-off skin-shaders or read aery-soul skin tutorial?

regards,

Bopperthijs

I usually set my main light  to 115-120% intensity and have one fill light (no shadows) and optionally an IBL light (no shadows).  You have to be careful with the intensity and IBL  though as it may give you a washed out look instead.    It's best to try first with just the two lights and add an IBL later if necesary.

Bopperthijs, thanks .... yes and yes ..... maybe i'm too harsh a self-critic but it still doesn't seem quite right.

Kalypso, thanks .... what type of lights (i.e. spot, etc) did you use ?

The main with the shadow can be either infinite or point, the fill is a low intensity infinite and so is the IBL.   I was just going to show you the difference between the point and infinite as main but P7SR1 threw a fit when I cancelled a arender.  I got a message, can't load texture, bad file and when I clicked ok on that it crashed to the desktop :)

Your master ambient light can be either 200%+ intensity or -200%, depends on whether you want to isolate the subjects from the surroundings or give the viewer scene details to amble through. And it really doesn't matter whether it's infinite, point, or a 135 degree spot, as long as it lights the scene.

Backgrounds either play a role or they simply frame the subjects you're bringing out through lighting.

Some say shaders make the figure, and most tutorials here at Renderosity say that postwork does all the job. Imo, if you learn the shaders well enough to apply them, you'll have a render that just can't be improved with postwork, though you may put stylistic emphasis on it.

Whilst I agree that lighting plays a large part in the renders you've mentioned, Andrew, I think there are other things at play, as well. TO me, it looks as though each of the figures was rendered separately and then placed with a less distinct background. This gives the figures a relative clarity against their background which may not appear so readily if the were against something render in the same settings as a background (if that makes any sense). The poses are against a non-descript paint-spattered backrgound, with no depth or real resolution to it; Ashley is kept bright by her lights, but the coastal backgroud behind her is dull and faded; and the shoes, whilst against a rendered background, are also much brighter than the non-product image. Also, in the case of the shoes, and extra light has been added to give it further lift and definition - the backlight. This tends to be a high intensity, non-shadow light pointing straight at the camera from behind the subject, and is what causes that sharp white line of definition on the edges of an item.

Clarity of render isn't just about textures, or lighting the whole scene well. It can also be about lighting a scene selectively, os that the elements you want the eye to focus on stand out from the rest.

jonthecelt

...you do know that DAZ uses DAZ|Studio (and/or Carrara nowadays) for their in-house renders, right? Oh, and Bryce for all the Bryce stuff. They're extremely huge into 'eating their own cooking', to put it in a phrase. (Heh - they published an entire children's Christmas story book using only D|S to do it). Nothing against Poser per se, but if you want to know how they do it, them's the main rendering tools. /P (PS: No, this ain't no NDA thingy that I'm aware of, either... so don't nobody go screaming).

Cant' see that being a particurlarly NDA-threatening disclosure, Penguinisto... hell, it would be more shocking to reveal that DAZ doesn't feel it can rely on it's own software to effectively render out its own products - because then, that would diminish faith in their programs (if they won't use their own software, there must be something wrong with it).

jonthecelt

Thanks all ... some great things to consider here .... goes away to experiment

Quote - ...you do know that DAZ uses DAZ|Studio (and/or Carrara nowadays) for their in-house renders, right? Oh, and Bryce for all the Bryce stuff. They're extremely huge into 'eating their own cooking', to put it in a phrase. (Heh - they published an entire children's Christmas story book using only D|S to do it). Nothing against Poser per se, but if you want to know how they do it, them's the main rendering tools. /P (PS: No, this ain't no NDA thingy that I'm aware of, either... so don't nobody go screaming).

They may be extremely huge when eating their own cooking, but then that says a lot about Hex, that they don't use that for their own modelling. Not even DAZ will touch it, no wonder it has been on sale for $1.99 lol!

NB: DAZ use Modo to model much of their stuff...they have very good taste! ;0)

How much modeling does DAZ actually do itself? A lot of their stuff is brokered, so I'm curious as to how much is actually 'theirs'.

jonthecelt

*Quote : "They may be extremely huge when eating their own cooking, but then that says a lot about Hex, that they don't use that for their own modelling. Not even DAZ will touch it, no wonder it has been on sale for $1.99 lol!"

*When it comes to Hexagon, they don't eat their own cooking cuz it will give them bad indigestion !

Quote - How much modeling does DAZ actually do itself? A lot of their stuff is brokered, so I'm curious as to how much is actually 'theirs'.

jonthecelt

...anything that says "DAZ Original" is theirs, and theirs alone. The rest is brokered. As for Hexagon, they prolly don't use it because they just recently bought it, and having modellers shift over to a whole new modelling toolkit (then learning it) in the middle of ongoing projects is pretty silly IMHO. Rendering and compositing, yes - much easier to switch things over mid-workflow, but when you're in the midst of a zillion-vertex project? Nuh-uh. Plus, I suspect (and speculate) that they want to improve it (Hexagon) to the point of pro-level usability first. /P

And of course you know you don't have to stick to DAZ products for modeling, rendering, etc.  Many folks, like myself, import poser models into other products for final scene and renderings.  Myself, I prefer to render my final scenes with Vue 6 Infinite.  Recently, I began learning Cinema 4D so I can use that to create more props and clothes for Poser characters.  

The attached picture I put here contains Victoria 3 for both the faery and lady as well as DAZ costumes.  I used Poser to pose them, then imported into Vue 6 Infinite for the final scene setup and render.