Quote - Heheh. Here's the view from my deck right now. It's very warm this afternoon, mid 30s. I'm looking west here, towards Mount Washington. Calls for wine and a cigar, I think.

Jealous: Just got off a 24 hour trip to visit our factory in China tomorrow. So the question BB is, since the daughter can drive the kids to the slope that gives you all day to make a wine and cigar shader doesn't it? I mean you have the examples right there in your hands don't you? Slacker...

Quote - A bit icy but the weather is perfect. I'm at Sunday River in Bethel, Maine. We haven't had natural snow for a couple weeks. They do man-made but it scrapes off by noon if there's a lot of traffic, which there was this weekend. This week is vacation week for all Massachusettes school kids (mine included) so the place is hopping. Which means my kids are ready to call it quits by 1 pm. Fine by me - I'm getting old and I'm way out of shape. I used to prepare a month in advance for these ski vacations but not this year - too much work.

However, I didn't ski today, so I'm not sure what it's like. My oldest daughter has her car here and drove herself and sister and a couple friends to the mountain today. Ah - the freedom of having older kids is awesome. I'm totally done with little kids. Yay!

We have lots of friends all here in the area in various condos and houses, so it's a blast even if we didn't ski. We're going to have 10 adults and 16 kids at my condo in a couple hours - pizza time!

I saw an interesting thread today about the economy. Is the economic crisis real or hyped? I read with horror all the stories about people losing jobs, hocking tools to pay utilities, stuff like that. I feel really lucky, but not in the sense that I was given a break. Rather, I'm lucky that I figured out how to maximize the value I create specifically in a depressed economy. I don't think a lot of people "game" the system the way I do. And yet, I don't seem uniquely lucky because there is a serious crapload of people up at this mountain, spending money like there's absolutely nothing wrong. It costs about $60 a day for a teenager to ski here, plus at least $10 for lunch on the mountain. So for me it's $140 a day just to let my kids go, and closer to $350 when my wife and I go skiing. (We eat and drink better than the kids.) And yet we're not alone, by a long shot. In fact, we have to wait for a table to eat a nice lunch. We have to wait in line when the kids want to demo another set of skis. (Demos cost another $50 a day.) It looks to me like there is a HUGE number of people who have no problem with the economy. So I don't know what to think, really. Looks like normal around here.

Oh well.

Quote - Ah - the freedom of having older kids is awesome. I'm totally done with little kids. Yay!

looking over at my avi

They're cute when they're young. LOL

Sounds like expensive fun.

I personally haven't been hit hard...nor do I notice a difference, but our situation can change at any minute.

It's a mess.

Quote - Heheh. Here's the view from my deck right now. It's very warm this afternoon, mid 30s. I'm looking west here, towards Mount Washington. Calls for wine and a cigar, I think.

Beautiful!

I can see this used in a Poser render. Hehe.

Okay, I've tried doubling RayBias on Ambient Occlusion for Template Skin, and that didn't solve the issue either.

This is really weird... I'll try reloading the texture again (a pain, because I've done mix 'n' match with the eyes, but oh well).

Quote - I saw an interesting thread today about the economy. Is the economic crisis real or hyped? I read with horror all the stories about people losing jobs, hocking tools to pay utilities, stuff like that.

...

It looks to me like there is a HUGE number of people who have no problem with the economy. So I don't know what to think, really. Looks like normal around here.

Oh well.

The majority haven't experienced any problems yet, and the higher you are above the average income level, the longer it will be before you feel the effect of the current economic downturn. The hundreds of thousands who are newly unemployed each week are near the bottom in terms of income to begin with. These are people who are earning minimum wage or just above (retail employees, non-union factory workers, etc).  Because they're considered the "least valuable" in the eyes of executives and shareholders, they'll get cut first. But they couldn't afford to go skiing (or take any sort of vacation for that matter), so the majority of job cuts going on right now won't be visible in places like ski resorts. When highly trained individuals in technical or developmental positions start getting cut, you'll have seen it coming for quite some time because the company will have been in bad shape for a while.

Remember that this recession has only been going on for about a year now. It wasn't actually recognized as such until nearly halfway through 2008. Many companies are trying to just scrape by for a few quarters and not cut whole projects or make other significant long term changes. They think the economy is going to start to turn around by Q3/Q4 2009. I wouldn't count on it. Even you might be feeling the squeeze by then.

Quote - The hundreds of thousands who are newly unemployed each week are near the bottom in terms of income to begin with.

that's not quite true.  again, the jobs i know of that have been cut in my parents area are all middle to upper middle class jobs.  in fact, one person i know of who was laid off was making 15,000 a month.  before bonuses.

Quote - Okay, I've tried doubling RayBias on Ambient Occlusion for Template Skin, and that didn't solve the issue either.

This is really weird... I'll try reloading the texture again (a pain, because I've done mix 'n' match with the eyes, but oh well).

It really looks like an AO artifact, but not the kind you get rid of with a bias adjustment. Bias artifacts look like solid black flecks. It looks to me more like an AO quality issue. Which means things to try are increasing the samples (only on the chest if you want to save time) and also increasing Irradiance Caching.

In situations like this, I try to isolate the factor. I'd put a shader on the area that has nothing but an AO node plugged into Alt_Diffuse, and turn off the built-in diffuse and specular (Diffuse_Value = 0, Specular_Value = 0) That would let me see exactly what the AO is doing and how the adjustments are affecting it.

Quote - Okay, I've tried doubling RayBias on Ambient Occlusion for Template Skin, and that didn't solve the issue either.

This is really weird... I'll try reloading the texture again (a pain, because I've done mix 'n' match with the eyes, but oh well).

If you're using the default light set that Poser loads with (which it looks like), then it's probable that the artifacts are caused by depth-mapped shadows instead.

Quote - > Quote - The hundreds of thousands who are newly unemployed each week are near the bottom in terms of income to begin with.

that's not quite true.  again, the jobs i know of that have been cut in my parents area are all middle to upper middle class jobs.  in fact, one person i know of who was laid off was making 15,000 a month.  before bonuses.

It's called a generalization. Obviously there have been some who lost their jobs who were making several hundreds of thousands a year or more and even a handful of executives making much more than that, but the VAST majority who face the near-term prospect of unemployment or are currently unemployed are or were below the average gross income in the US. The small percentage who have been laid off who were above the average gross income are still few enough that they don't bear mentioning.

Thanks, Bagginsbill and Nevare.

I've got another issue with V4 on another front (a recurring arm posing problem, noted in another thread), and it's been recommended that I uninstall and reinstall. So will try to sort this stuff out after that. Hopefully all goes well.

Hmm... I tried that, and got this result. Clearly something is different somewhere, but it's too late in the evening for me to figure it out now. The proper render looks great (it's PBIV texture), so VSS is doing things right; but this isn't coming out as expected.

I'm working on bump maps for a new character, and the process has driven home that it would be nice to set up VSS in such a way that re-synchronizing - which I've done quite often, trying to get the optimal bump setting - wouldn't remove the bump maps every time. (Obviously, you can't have a specific bump map for Template Skin, since it's dealing with a wide variety of maps. So every time I synch, I need to re-attach my bumps.)

Has this been discussed? Obviously, I want the setting itself to be controlled by VSS, but not the mapping as such. Or am I doing something wrong?

I'm not sure what you're doing, so I can't say it's wrong. :)

Here's what you're supposed to do.

On your figure, connect your color map to Diffuse_Color and your bump map to Bump. Set this up on every material zone as you normally would do.

In the VSS Template Skin, you should NOT put any files. You leave them blank with no files specified.

When you synchronize, the shader and all settings, including bump strength are copied to your figure, but the actual files are used as they were found on the figure.

Thanks Bagginsbill. Maybe it's not staying attached because I'm adding the bump map in the simple palette rather than the advanced one (?). Hm, will have to experiment.

Edit: But that doesn't really make sense, as I'm not having this problem with the main colour map, and I added that via the simple tab....

So what becomes of your bump map then. Does VSS just leave it on the figure, not connected to anything?

Did you modify the Template Skin setup? Because there is a bump map in it, and in all cases it populates it with the file name it found on your figure's bump map.

However, if you somehow disconnected the bump map placeholder in the template, then VSS will think you don't want to use the bump maps on the figure. It will just leave them there.

I set up the VSS Template Skin so that if you have a bump map, it will use the bump map. If you do not have a bump map, it will use a Turbulence node instead. Are you getting a Turbulence node plugged into Bump or nothing plugged into Bump?

I'm getting nothing. (EDIT: I should say: template skin is showing the bump node connected to turbulence; what I meant by "nothing" is that after synching, no bump is attached, although I had it active before.)

I'm trying to remember the order I did things, though... because this is a character in development, I probably originally synched to VSS before I added the bump map. Would the solution then be to delete the VSS object and start over?

Thanks again!

"I'm getting nothing"

Just to confirm, after synchronizing and you look at a skin zone on the figure, the bump channel has nothing plugged in at all?

"template skin is showing the bump node connected to turbulence"
You mean the bump channel or bump parameter or bump input of the surface? (Nodes are the whole boxes, The things you connect nodes to are called channels or parameters or inputs. A node contains channels or parameters.)
And please confirm, the bump channel in template skin is connected to turbulence? It is not connected to an Image_Map?

From this I'm very confused.

1) In VSS template skin I connected the bump channel to an image map, which is connected to a turbulence. If that's not the case, then you changed it. If your template bump is connected to turbulence, then your target material bump should also be connected to turbulence.
2) You said your target material bump is connected to nothing.

That is impossible.

Quote - I'm trying to remember the order I did things, though... because this is a character in development, I probably originally synched to VSS before I added the bump map. Would the solution then be to delete the VSS object and start over?

Perhaps. Certainly if you modified the VSS object accidentally, you should get rid of that damanged VSS prop and load a fresh one.

On the other hand, if you intentionally modified the shader rules or the shaders themselves, then you'd lose all your work. It may be that there is only a small change that needs to be put back.

However, if you never touched the VSS prop, then loading another one that is identical to it will change nothing.

Any critiques?

In my opinion, her skin is reflecting too much light which makes her look too shiny, almost like plastic. I've had that problem with certain skins for V4 too, particularly with black characters. In fact, it may be only really noticeable on black skin. You could turn up the IBL intensity and lower the Infinite light intensity, or the better solution may be to adjust the various Shine values in the VSS prop.

Quote - In my opinion, her skin is reflecting too much light which makes her look too shiny, almost like plastic. I've had that problem with certain skins for V4 too, particularly with black characters. In fact, it may be only really noticeable on black skin. You could turn up the IBL intensity and lower the Infinite light intensity, or the better solution may be to adjust the various Shine values in the VSS prop.

Thanks. Will try these suggestions.

actually... i think it's not too shiny.  it's too desaturated, and your hightlights are too grey and don't show enough sss.  google image search for references with the skin tone and lighting you want.

Attached Link: Sasia

I'd like her skintone to look the same as in her promo...only VSS-ified. LOL

but her promo doesn't look like anything real.  at all. it's impossible to judge anything based on that image.

Quote - > Quote - actually... i think it's not too shiny.  it's too desaturated, and your hightlights are too grey and don't show enough sss.  google image search for references with the skin tone and lighting you want.

I'd like her skintone to look the same as in her promo...only VSS-ified. LOL

Are you using any form of gamma correction, either Poser Pro's integrated GC function or Bagginsbill's Artistic Lens method?

Did you reduce the intensity of the BB Indoor lights? Those light sets were released for use with VSS 1, and later version of VSS don't need lights that bright.

@**cobaltdream

I sent you sitemail.

****JWFokker,
No, I am not using any GC as GC is in the shader tree (VSS prop) already if I'm not mistaken. I did not reduce the intensity ,as in the preview window (with the default settings), her skin looked dark and I figured it would get darker with less light/intensity.
**

bagginsbill.
in your eyewhite shader you used a trick for some color variation. you conncted the specular to blender and used blue and red colors.

but if we turn off specular on the light then this effects isnt working anymore right? what if we used a toon shader insted of the specular? 

Quote - @**cobaltdream

I sent you sitemail.

****JWFokker,
No, I am not using any GC as GC is in the shader tree (VSS prop) already if I'm not mistaken. I did not reduce the intensity ,as in the preview window (with the default settings), her skin looked dark and I figured it would get darker with less light/intensity.
**

Okay, that rules out the possibility that you were simply applying GC twice, but you will definitely want to try reducing the light intensity because the Preview window is not at all representative of the final render when it comes to light. In fact, the Preview window is so much darker than the render that I generally use an extra IBL light at 100% intensity or higher to light the scene while I'm posing it, and then turn it off when I need to render the scene. Reduce the light intensities by 1/3 or 1/2 and then do a render. The results should be quite different, but not what you'd call too dark. You'll likely have a richer image because the colors won't be so washed out. If that turns out not to be the case, then I'd go back to my first suggestion, which was that the Shine values need to be adjusted for darker/browner skintones.

Just out of curiousity, could you change the GC value to 1, re-synchronize and re-render your scene?  I'm inclined to think that there is too much GC present for the skin texture but I could be entirely wrong.  If the original texture was created with GC already present from the 2D application, we may be seeing over compensation for GC in this situation.

That would mean it needs incoming gamma compensation... BB has talked about that somewhere too... course, it's also somewhere in the Poser Pro manual.

Remember, this is happening in Poser 6, not PoserPro or Poser 7.  I have performed renders of models with dark skin and have no problems with the VSS prop settings.  Of course, I am using PoserPro and my render settings are set for GC=2.2.  Subsequently, the prop GC setting has been adjusted to 1.

Hborre

I forgot to save my scene and ran into a texture loading problem so am re-doing it. I will do as you suggested and repost soon.

there is a material zone called SoftTissue in apollo . its wet tissue between the skin and the eyes.

what shaders are you using there?

You mean what does VSS have assigned to it? I don't know. Run VSS and it tells you.

it doesnt change it.
how would yo udo it? a simple GC material with the glosy specular?

It's the same as lacrimal - use the EyeWhite shader.

thank you.

What changes would I need to make for a character with non ccausian skin, say like green, blue ro red skin? I assume it'd be diffuse, but I don't want to change the diffuse of the eyes and iris, etc.

The VSS template skin distinguishes between skin and eyes, so no worries there.

You can change the basic diffuse, but if you're working in the advanced tab, you'll probably get the quickest results altering one of the colour multiplier nodes.

Actually, before making any modifications to the nodes, synchronize the VSSProp, render and see what you get.  I applied the VSSProp to alien skin seen at this link:

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1827909

I have also created a separate prop for Nybras with rather successful results.

Quote - What changes would I need to make for a character with non ccausian skin, say like green, blue ro red skin? I assume it'd be diffuse, but I don't want to change the diffuse of the eyes and iris, etc.

Are we talking about how to force a normal human skin texture to look like your avatar? Or are we talking about what shader to use with a color map that's blue or some other non-human color?

If the latter, probably not much. You might want to change the SSS color in the Template Skin material. It's a red tone for humans. You can change it to any color you like. Once you open the Template Skin material (it's on the control prop) you'll find all the interesting parameters in nodes on the left side. The SSS ones are near the bottom.

You can see my results of my renders with VSS in my gallery (noodity warning) and they look washed-out color wise. I put down VSS and have been using Aery-Soul's skin shader successfuly but tonight I did a test render of a caucasian female using VSS with some better lights and ahmahgahd did it look good. She looked soft, like females do! So I want to learn more about VSS and I will do some test renders with the color node changes and see what I get.

And yeah, my avatar is a render I did, using V4 Real Skin Shader, before I got into Aery_Soul's shader. But now that I m learning more about your skin shader ( which is seperate from VSS, I know) I'm really impressed and want to play with it more.

Here's something I just tried - maybe it will get you closer to what you want. Start with the PR3 shader. (I used the non-AO one here.)

I added a math node connected to the Tint parameter. This boosts the color. When you tint a human skin there's not much blue to work with, but boosting it I was able to get a pretty intense blue. I also made the SSS color yellow and increased the SSS Amount a lot. I also increased the Shine and the Diffuse Reflectivity.

 So I just downloaded all the new files on the vss homepage and my PR3 control prop does not have a TINT dial.

Am i missing something?

Open the material room for the VSSProp and scroll to the very left side.  You will find a series of PM nodes; the top most is the color tint.

 Well there's something different between PC rendering and Mac rendering. Mac looks very washed out and flat, no depth at all to the skin. Any idea why?

show a render and expplain what lights you are using.

A little more detail about what you are doing for each render will help.

Is this an older MAC with some GC built into the monitor?