Quote -

interesting.

could it be that Antonia's neck is a little to long?

No. In the original pic, Antonia's upper arm was at about a 35 to 40 degree angle, and the photo of the model's arm is at about 80-85 degrees of angle.  Big difference of elevation.

labia will natuarally open a bit when legs are spread that far apart.. won't get lower though.  Sorry, not going to post you pictures.  =)

Not being a woman, I WILL take your word for it! :laugh: Pics would probably get us ALL busted!:lol: So forget that.

Impressive work!! I am afraid that you will make some other creators envy (those i already mentioned who made things for sale that don't work half as well). Fisty is right about the labia and if you have the same effect when the figure bends forward it's no error as well and yes, that's a completely technical note and no, I don't post pictures as well . If you can keep the effect you should do it as it adds more natural appear to the figure - although I and many other artists hardly render anything this way it adds even more naturalism to this girl.

Oh: I will work on the feets tomorrow. Today I had a natural desire for fresh air and some ice cream outside

If I had some money, I'd have some Ice Cream. Since it's drizzling again, I'll work on my own poser stuff.

Those are definitely looking good, I especially like what you have done with the labia. As you can tell I had problems with that part myself. So when you are done with these I would very much like to study what you have done. I have my own Angie coming up for JCM's etc so the more I can learn here the beter.

I had a question for you too while I'm thinking about it. It has to do with the lower jaw. In another thread you mentioned slaving the lower jaw to the open mouth morphs. I have been thinking about that and am wondering if there is an advantage to doing it that way rather than slaving the morphs to the lower jaw? 

cheers,
Mike.

It has to do with what people know, I think.  Up until V4, the jaws were attached to the head.  I still think that way myself.  So I look for the head controls on the head.

It's the way the real human head works. When you open your mouth, your lower jaw hinges down. Putting an ERC into the lower jaw to respond to certain morphs shouldn't be that hard, and would work realistically. It might have to do with reducing clicks.  Moving the jaw to match the mouth after the mouth is morphed IS more work.  That's my 2 cents on it.

Is this not logical?  If people want to move the jaws after wards, they still can.

Too subtle? :lol:

PS: Mike, no problem. Since my upload speed is rather slow, I'd probably just send you the figure as saved from Studio and the pose and MLP configuration files to go with them. You should be able to reconstruct the obj files from those, but if that doesn't work, you can of course have the originals, too.

:ohmy: Mate, yer pushing the envelope until the postman won't deliver it any more! :laugh: To subtle?

No one can accuse of THAT anymore!:lol:  Those leg bends are looking good,btw.

Yeah, too subtle, unfortunately.  1/2cm more apart to look realistic.. right now looks like she got into some glue.  =)   Rest of the bend looks great.

No problem, the respective morph is already done :D

Concerned?! Did I sound concerned?! No... I didn't :laugh:

Quote - Yeah, too subtle, unfortunately.  1/2cm more apart to look realistic.. right now looks like she got into some glue.  =)   Rest of the bend looks great.

Well, I guess I'll have to go and look at some references then. It's all in the interest of art...

LOL

Clothes can be useful sometimes. Or so I hear...

Looking good, Starkdog.

Sweet!! I like dynamic clothes better than conforming when it comes to skirts and so I am really looking forward to your set!!

And you may see that Antonia learnt some new poses. I was able to create a dat-file for Puppet Master. As this was the first try for me that lead to anything (I tried before but failed) there is still some tweaking needed as Antonias feet often twist like crazy when copying a pose from another figure to her. But I fixed this for every pose I "translated" for her and I am pretty pleased with the result. The most impressing thing on Antonia is the "Instep" bodypart that splits the foot in two parts. Believe me, this is something that V4 will be envy of because Antonia looks far better when she balances on her toes or when the upper side of the foot touches the body (like you have it with some kneeling and crouching poses). You don't have to bend her toes in a way that almost hurts when you see it. You can take some of the bending from the toes and "move" it to the instep part - very cool and very realistic.

Unfortunatly I can not give the poses away as they are made from poses that are commercial products I once bought. But if someone who owns puppet master is interested (and not afraid to do some tweaking on feet, arms and hands) I can offer the dat-file. Maybe someone who's reading this comes to better results or is able to refine the dat-file...

Oh: I did not create anything for the toecaps so far. If a texture is needed - please point me into the right direction what you want to see on them.

Rosy legs is fine, because real people have lots of variations in their skins!  Looking really good.

The texture looks great. I like pale.

The "texture" looks great, but the render of it is terrible. Use gamma correction in Poser Pro, or use my VSS shader.

Once again they stop sending me E-Mail on this thread glad I stop by again....Is there a new up date for her?

Quote - Once again they stop sending me E-Mail on this thread glad I stop by again....Is there a new up date for her?

The one in my file locker is still the latest. I will probably not upload anything new before I finish the new JCMs.

Cool I believe I have that one...With the new up date I might be able to do more interesting poses:) Can't wait for it to come out.

I am aware that the render is terrible - I was not so much after showing an artistic render but for showing the texture in progress and some posing abilities. As said: I just plugged the texture map into the diffuse channel (sat to plain white) and that's it. At the moment advanced material settings lead me to nothing as the textures still contain all the seams. When everything is ready I will hand out this set with bump, specular map and a decent material system (with and without AO). Gamma correction is something I do not use when showcasing my work as it is not available for users of Poser 7 or lower and so gives a wrong impression of the result they can achieve.

artistheat: Please let me know if you have use for the dat-file and I send it along (or maybe you get better results than I did). The updated version now works in Poser 7 and Poser Pro as well!

Quote - Gamma correction is something I do not use when showcasing my work as it is not available for users of Poser 7 or lower and so gives a wrong impression of the result they can achieve.

That's not quite true. As BB has demonstrated, gamma correction can be done in shaders fairly easily. You don't need anything higher than Poser 5 for material-based GC.

Okay, I see what you mean - I immediatly thought that you what meant here are the gamma correction in the render presets that you have with Poser Pro!

But off of that: Please have some patience with me - and some understanding that I wanted to allow a look on the pure, "unpimped" texture because before we are going into seam correction I wanted to show what I have at the moment so that if most of your dislike the tone of the legs or the overall look I can make corrections. If I add anything that alters the texture you will not have the plain unaltered result anymore and things will look better as they are in reality.
 

I agree that any "special effects" like fake SSS and such would distract from the color map. But on the other hand I think that using gamma correction would actually be a good thing in this case, because the "yellow bloom" is quite distracting, too.

Also, since this is not a promo image as such, I don't think you need to be that concerned about misleading people.

Hehe... that must be the merchant in me who wants to offer a straightforward look on what he does (that's the reason for showing these supernasty sams on the feet ). As soon as the set is ready I want to offer it to the other devolpers, with mat poses and all odds and ends but also for creating their own material settings with them or create makeups and whatever comes to their minds.

I hope you're not offended - it's just that I'm on a crusade.

I'm not asking for artistic renders. I'm not asking for fancy shaders. I'm just saying, you're showing your texture badly - your texture doesn't look like what you showed us. Poser doesn't render colors properly unless you do some gamma correction. Suppose you showed us a render in Adobe RGB color space - that would be just as misleading as a linear color space render.

As odf said, GC is available in Poser 5 and up - you just have to set up a couple Color_Math:Pow nodes. Here is M4 with just his color map - no bump map, no SSS, no specular effect at all. One is the Diffuse color map and the other is Diffuse color map, gamma corrected. This is one render, done without Poser Pro gamma correction - same as is possible in Poser 5 and up.

If I was trying to understand what the M4 color map looks like, I'd say the one on the left (without GC) does not show me that, while the one on the right does.

As is classicly done, you raised your light intensity to try to show us all the colors, but it blew out the parts facing the light. That's why you aren't really showing us your lovely work. You're showing us some dead looking shadow areas and some blown out highlight areas - nothing in your render resembles the great work you put into it.

I'm not doing anything fancy with lights here - I used a 10% white ibl (no image) and a single white infinite light at 80%. Very simple - can be set up in 20 seconds.

By the way - other merchants are showing their texture work with VSS shaders applied. They just don't always come right out and say so.

If they sell it with this material system they have every right to show their textures this way! If not... well... no, I will not discuss this here.

Of course I am not offended, any advice is welcome. May I ask in what channels you do plug the color math nodes?

The color map is still plugged into Diffuse_Color so that preview looks like your texture set. But the Diffuse_Value = 0, which turns off the built-in diffuse calculation.

We use a Diffuse node, which does the same thing, but we do some work before and after.

Before, we anti-gamma correct the color map, so that the colors become their true linear representation. We use the Power function for this, with a value of 2.2 for standard sRGB display gamma. This data is fed to the Diffuse node, which performs the basic diffuse lighting model calculation. The result of that is fed to another Poser function, but this uses 1 / 2.2 for the exponent, bringing us back sRGB color space (how your monitor actually works.) That is plugged into Alternate_Diffuse, which is basically a do-nothing socket. Whateve you plug in there is drawn in the render. It doesn't actually perform any sort of Diffuse lighting model.

This image uses the same light settings as the one with the laying Antonia.

Yes well you are a master of using extra lights to accomplish what this shader is doing. Unfortunately, you have to un-learn that tactic. Now that the material is behaving realistically, we find that all the lights you've been using are overkill.

This has come up many times in discussions with many users who are trying to use existing light sets with gamma correction. In particular, a couple users have mentioned overexposure when using your light sets. LOL

Nothing wrong with your light sets for the old way of doing things. But you added lots more light than is physically realistic in order to fill in the areas that looked too dark from Poser. You were basically gamma correcting the materials by shining extra lights on any area that was showing too dark.

But they don't show too dark anymore, so you can shut down a lot of those lights. All the tricks you developed for making realistic looking renders via extra lighting are going to work against you now.

Start simple. Render with only 1 infinite light at 60 to 70%. Then add some IBL until the shadows are no longer black. That's usually all you need - two lights.

I recently posted some lighting charts containing 140 renders. These charts help you pre-visualize how lights are supposed to behave, as they do in real life. Have a look:

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?message_id=3440889&ebot_calc_page#message_3440889

Honey_ZA posted her first render using VSS gamma-corrected materials in September. It was also using one of your light sets.

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1752042

That first one was ok, but...

Look over her stuff since then. All of it is with GC shaders and the quality of her work is outstanding. That sort of realism cannot be achieved with clever lighting alone. Or at least not as easily. She's cranking out tons of great work now. Almost all of it is just two lights.

This is what I get when I use one single pointlight from my Encore set, the point light lits the figure from the site, it's directed towards the face (obvilously)

What intensity was the point light? It still looks very strong.

I see two shadows ! Are you sure there is only one light?

I see only one shadow. Am I turning blind?

One moment, I'll look it up and post a jpg instead of the png

Mine is.

bagginsbill: I thought it was simply the unlit part of the breast. But looking at it again, I agree that bits of it look more like a cast shadow.

I used a pointlight with raytraced shadows. These look always a bit brittle (that's the off-part) and more transparent (that's the reason I like them anyway).