Back again, just spent some time doing GC v Non GC renders using Bantha's Wacro which seems to be endorsed by Bagginsbill on the thread where you can download it.

Pros:- Very quick to apply to a figure using the Wacro, it's something that you could use without it becoming an issue.

Cons:- To be honest I wasn't overly impressed by the result, the Wacro works fine, I don't mean the python scripting, what I mean is that the textures seemed to wash out too much even after lowering the lights to compensate. When I lowered the lights even further to aleviate the wash out, the whole scene seemed too murky. On first try it was a bit too much like VSS which I don't use due to the washed out waxy look it gives to skin shaders.

On the whole I find the Real Skin Shaders do a much nicer job and will probably continue to use them, when I render in Poser, as GC ing and VSS doesn't produce anything like a good result for me.

Also on the newer V4 M4 etc textures the nodes seem to be set up to give a Real Skin Shader type of result, so to me GC and VSS are not really necessary and don't give as good a result.

I used a plain old V3 skin to do my tests and the effort to compensate for the wash out of GC and to try to put some decent shadows back into the image seemed to negate GC ing in the first place.

As for the mathematically correct argument, well I don't like maths and have no interest in it. If the programme can't do the maths properly in the first place then that's down to Poser. I don't need to buy Pro 2010 as I have other applications in which I do most of my renders, and maybe that's why I don't render much in Poser these days except for tests to get things set up.

I gave it a try but I'm unimpressed by the results I was getting, perhaps I'm doing it wrong but if so then it's a bit of a time waste as there are quicker ways to acheive better results for me.

If it works for you then that's great, I really mean that.

Cheers.