Sorry 78, 73 - all looks the same after two allergy pills. :) LOL

Stefan,

The ability to render to EXR and adjust exposure afterwards is really nice.

Excellent. Thanks stewer, I'll definitely look into it. take care jdc

 I'm ignoring all the math talk as it is way beyond me...

After spending most of the weekend reading thru this thread and trying things out, I have a question (and a headache...).

I'm on an intel mac laptop, OS 10.4.11 and have had the same issues as other mac users. I run the vssMainButtons.py. The buttons appear correctly but don't function. I run VSS/Synchronize by running wacro1.py. And VSS/Render by running wacro2.py (can I render the old fashioned way as well?). I saw that one mac user didn't seem to have a problem but was working on OS 10.5.x which I think is Leopard, so maybe something about Leopard links up better with your code. It seems to work okay using the wacros. So that is just a confirmation of another mac user.

I'm attaching 2 pictures, one before VSS and one after (using indoor lighting1 and VSSprop2). There's definitely an improvement in skin tones, etc. but I find, for close ups, the look to be kind of "freckly." At least on this model (by surreality, one of my favorite modelers; her skins are beautiful but very light). Is there a (n easy) way to decrease this effect? Maybe in your pro version, one has a choice of skin tones (eg. very fair, fair, medium, etc) that applies this effect more specifically... IF that is the reason for the freckliness. Looking at "Jordan" by Santel (which is just amazing!) I can barely see that same effect being applied.

Thanks, bagginsbill, for all your hard work, patience and good humor!

Diane

(btw, I ranked the lightness/darkness on your scale between 3 and 4, for whatever it's worth)
 

 before VSS

 Sorry, it clearly doesn't like the way I click on the Choose File button to attach. Suggestions?

Hi DancingCat.

Make sure your images are under 200K - there's a limit in this forum. I usually save from Poser in JPEG at 90% - that usually fits.

I assume you're just hitting the Browse... button and choosing the image? That is all it takes.

The freckliness is sometimes too strong as you say. This will be a dial, eventually. For now, open the VSS prop in the material room. Find the Spots node. In the second color, put white. No more freckles at all. Look back over previous messages - i made a diagram of the skin shader with an arrow pointing to this color that controls the freckles.

 before VSS

maybe...

Oh, okay. Thought it might be something like that but I couldn't find the restrictions posted. The jpegs were around 300k. Are dimensions limited also?

Since you were able to answer without the pictures, do you still want to see them?

And like everybody else, I apologize if you're having to answer the same thing again. Alot of pages to go thru...

Somebody should make a FAQ!

There are no limits to image dimension.

You could still post with and without freckles to show others what we're talking about.

Then when they ask about this again 15 pages from now I can sigh and say "go back to page 19". LOL

I'm still liking this VSS, I'm just learning as I go along.

Here's one thing I like to know.

I d/l the VSS2 and upon selecting the prop on P7, it comes up as VSS1, now is that VSS2 or do I have the wrong prop?  I don't know whether I have the current one.  I'll check back and see if I got the correct one.

This has been an interesting thread and thanks for responding back.

JB

I checked back and I downloaded the VSS PR2 and it's the correct one.

So, I'll still be playing with this feature.

Thanks again,

JB

Dancing Cat, looks like that's one of Surreality's girls. 

I've stayed away from testing VSS on any of her textures because all of her make-up textures rely heavily on her own node setup to look right, not that that impacts your pics.  I am hoping that a few merchants that do use nodes to add make-up effects take a look at BB's excellent node setup and adapt it into their own node set-ups.

Thanks for the pics, DancingCat/Diane. Interesting subtle differences there. The big difference is VSS got rid of the yellow bloom and the nostril glow.

I forgot to say that you don't need to use macro2 to render - it just renders. Nothing special.

I'll upload a new script soon. I'm really mystified as to why the buttons don't work for MAC. I'm following all the rules for making path names properly. The new script doesn't fix the problem, because I don't know what the problem is, but it will print out a little more information that might help me figure it out.

As for the prop name, PR1 and PR2 have the same name. I forgot to change the name. I'll make sure PR3 says VSS3 on the prop so there's no confusion. Frankly I expected Poser to use the name I last saved it under, but it doesn't. Strange.

Diane, you said you matched splat #3 to #4? That's odd - everything I read says Mac users should think #5 or #6. Oh well - that's fine - it means you see pretty much what I see.

can we also build in a function to add AO to the material?

Quote - can we also build in a function to add AO to the material?

Could you explain what you mean? There is AO in the VSS shaders already.

Or, render to layers, and adjust each light's exposure individually and re-compose in a paint program. Which IMVHO is the way to go for watertight illumination control.

lets say for example i have an prop. i dont know what. and it had 10 different material zones. i would need very long to change AO settings.
so could i use VSS for this?

Hello manoloz Your idea of rendering in layers is very much like creating an HDR image. Also, this exposure stuff has me wondering if complaints I'm hearing about Poser Pro NOT rendering like Poser 6/7 may have to do with exposure settings. Well, Poser Pro's HDRI output might resolve this isssue. I came across a freeware program (for Windows) called Picturenaut that can create HDR images as well as adjust Gamma/Exposure for HDR renders/Photos. check it out http://www.hdri-handbook.com/picturenaut/index.html later jdc

I use picturenaut almost dayly!
It is very useful.

What I mean rendering in layers, is via the Python script, which renders the same image, but on a light per light basis, with the option of also rendering an occlusion layer, as well as a diffuse layer.

If you then compose the layers in, say Photoshop, and adjust the exposure per light, you can get much more control tweaking the image to perfection than just a "general" exposure.

For example, the backlight is just perfect, but the main light is too "hot". Adjusting exposure for the whole image would be very time consuming, and you probably wouldn´t get the desired result without re-rendering. But if you rendered each light in separate layers, you would just underexpose the main light, and leave the back light untouched.
I think that in fact, PoserPro not rendering like Poser6 or 7 IS A FEATURE!!! I have wanted Poser to have this since I started working with Poser.

Ahhh, I see, interesting idea. quote I think that in fact, PoserPro not rendering like Poser6 or 7 IS A FEATURE!!! Agreed! take care jdc

Quote -
Diane, you said you matched splat #3 to #4? That's odd - everything I read says Mac users should think #5 or #6. Oh well - that's fine - it means you see pretty much what I see.

I got real frustrated with uploading last night (even after I had the nec info and some success), so I'm a little tardy checking in today. Yes, about the splat test, that's why I mentioned it. On the mac, there's a lengthy configuration process for the monitor and maybe because it's a laptop, things are adjusted differently. I did alot of multimedia/web work over the last 15 years or so, so generally I always adjusted my monitor to 2.2 so I'd have a better idea of how most end users would see. Maybe I see that way too now! ;-P

Yes, blade68, it's Esmeraude 2 (Daz) which has 5 or 6 heads morphs for V4 and A4 each. I love surreality's morphs and skins. I changed the spot shader to .05 and like it; I'll try a version with that and some makeup to see how you like it.

Oh, and bb, a few posts ago you mentioned about starting several separate threads on specific issues (which someone thought was a joke!) and I thought it was a great idea. But I guess I need hand holding on some of this stuff.

"What I mean rendering in layers, is via the Python script, which renders the same image, but on a light per light basis, with the option of also rendering an occlusion layer, as well as a diffuse layer."

Aren't these sophisticated Render Engines already doing this, and if not, shouldn't they?

Quote - What I mean rendering in layers, is via the Python script, which renders the same image, but on a light per light basis, with the option of also rendering an occlusion layer, as well as a diffuse layer. 

Semidieu's "Advanced Render Settings" at RuntimeDNA does some of that and he might be open to expanding it to do a light by light version. He's both clever and accomodating!

I've seen that app - it makes all the stuff you already have in various dialogs into one dialog. Most of it you can already do, just not in one place.

You guys know you already have per-light rendering, right? It's in the Python Scripts menu - Rendering Control - Render Passes. It's been there for ages, not just in Poser Pro.

Quote - You guys know you already have per-light rendering, right? It's in the Python Scripts menu - Rendering Control - Render Passes. It's been there for ages, not just in Poser Pro.

Duh! I don't even know what I don't know.

There are known knowns, meaning there things we know that we know. There are known unknowns, things we know that we don't know. But then there are the unknown unknowns. Things we don't know that we don't know.

What happened to the guy that said that?

BB, what does the render passes thing do for us exactly? And that was certainly a unknown, unknown. Hold it maybe not. I've seen it, but didn't know what it did, so its a known unknown.

basically, it gives you the ability to combine them  an image editor and optimize how you want them to look.  D|S has a tool that does this (you can even render specular alone), and, iirc, Dreamlight, theSea and others have shown how to use the layers for optimal drama or realism.  i never got into it myself and didn't feel like spending $14 on making my postwork even more complex (because every figure has major anatomical flaws obvious even to me).  i had no clue it was in Poser (probably not P6, though, huh?).  i think i'd have to majorly upgrade my computer along with my version of Poser to try something like that. my final renders are 2400+ px.  but maybe separating each aspect out would be faster than i'd think.

It's slightly slower than a "combined" render, but it's fast enough for what it does, IMO.

Rumsfield said the "known unknown" speech, right?

brain,.... hurts

Cobaltdream has it right. You get to combine the individual render passes using some other tool, where you can adjust the brightness of each pass (or the darkness of the shadow/AO pass) one-by-one without re-rendering.

I experimented with this technique a while ago. I even built my own tool to combine the passes in interesting ways, because it's a bit tedious to do in photoshop or similar programs. A purpose-built program to combine the separate render passes makes things easier. Particularly, what you want to do that is missing from photoshop is to select some subset of the passes and raise or lower their brightess together, or do the opposite, where you choose a layer or group of layers and raise or lower its "weight", simultaneously doing the opposite to all the others.

However, I do a lot of work with reflection and the separate reflections never seemed to combine nicely. I now understand (doh) that the problem was that I was combining the layers linearly, when what I needed to do was gamma correct the combination. Reflections, being of necessity relatively low in brightness, really need to be gamma corrected in order to keep the correct visual relationship to the other elements in the scene.

Because I was never satisfied with the results, I abandoned the separate-passes technique, preferring to get the render closer to correct in the first place.

Looking back over all I've done, I see now that over and over I was fighting with visual flaws that were entirely because the way my screen showed me the final product was not accurate, even though the math, up to that point, was correct.

I don't think that Photoshop can correctly perform the assembly of separate passes into a gamma corrected whole interactively.

Perhaps I should resurrect and finish the tool I was building and put it out for everybody to use.

Quote - brain,.... hurts

I get that a lot :)

Where can I find these?

OK, BB what do you think. I would like your critique. The top is straight out of the box using your Indoor Lights 2.

The middle is VSS2. No fiddling (because I wouldn't know where to begin).

The last is my custom shader that I normally use. Actually, its based on your earlier stuff and stuff I learned from face_off.

To me the top one is way off. Not good looking at all. The middle is quite realistic and I especially like the soft shadowing. But I still like the last one. I like the skin sheen (now you'll tell me VSS does skin sheen) and I don't mind the darker shadow either as I think visually an oily skin will produce darker shadows.

cobaltdream,

A while back you said "i don't see how an infinite light at 1% should make the figure only a little less bright as my spot, eliminating the clear edge of my spot."

This is troubling me. I know you think you should not show renders, but that is a pretty wild statement. Only a little less bright as your spot? That's not what I see at all.

I will now post some test renders. Using VSS, I applied a simple diffuse-only material to the entire Simon figure: Diffuse_Value=1, Diffuse_Color=white. I'm using this simple material so we have no confusion about colors and speculars and such.

I will show a spotlight at 100%, infinite at 100%, infinite at 10%, and infinite at 1%. All will have two renders, without GC and with GC.

I don't see what you describe at all. You need to show me what you're doing and seeing. My infinite at 1% is way darker than my spotlight.

Quote -
Perhaps I should resurrect and finish the tool I was building and put it out for everybody to use.

Yes, please do!
Not just for Poser's sake!
Those of us without a film-production budget will greatly appreciate it!

Quote - iirc, Dreamlight, theSea

Where can I find these?

http://www.dream-lounge.com/dreamlight/home.htm

http://www.renderosity.com/homepage.php?userid=427128

Dreamlight's stuff is only for DAZ Studio, I like a lot of his products and wish he'd do them for Poser also.

As far as compositing, http://www.daz3d.com/i.x/shop/itemdetails/-/?item=3946&_m=d, I have read good things about it but never used it myself.

~Kat~

edited to fix url

Okay, I am so new- and not sure where I should post this- but is shaders just lights?
I am learning how to make characters and I want to find out about shaders in poser 7.
Thanks!
Penny

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?thread_id=2722867

Hey, Penny!

Welcome to 3D! :) The term "shaders" in "Poser" terms usually refers to the "node" features in the Material room. The "shaders" can bring out depth and realism to any figure. For example like BagginBill's VSS shader script/package here in this thread.

Here's a quick link attached to my reply to a forum thread here at Renderosity with a lot of helpful links. Hopefully this will be of some help to you. :)

--R.

Quote - There are known knowns, meaning there things we know that we know. There are known unknowns, things we know that we don't know. But then there are the unknown unknowns. Things we don't know that we don't know.

What happened to the guy that said that?

BB, what does the render passes thing do for us exactly? And that was certainly a unknown, unknown. Hold it maybe not. I've seen it, but didn't know what it did, so its a known unknown.

for example we know that we can not control the AO strength. so you render a seperate pass of AO. then in photoshop you make the opacity 50 %.
voila.

you can change the colors. its briliant.

Quote - > Quote - > Quote - What I mean rendering in layers, is via the Python script, which renders the same image, but on a light per light basis, with the option of also rendering an occlusion layer, as well as a diffuse layer. 

Semidieu's "Advanced Render Settings" at RuntimeDNA does some of that and he might be open to expanding it to do a light by light version. He's both clever and accomodating!

I've seen that app - it makes all the stuff you already have in various dialogs into one dialog. Most of it you can already do, just not in one place.

You guys know you already have per-light rendering, right? It's in the Python Scripts menu - Rendering Control - Render Passes. It's been there for ages, not just in Poser Pro.

not funny man. i made special materials for seperate AO renders for post. can we use this for animation?

is there something else i need to find out? :)

edit

too much to respond to right now, and probably not tonight, either.  i & boyfriend are beginning the long process of cleaning for moving, which the heat slowing down considerably.