Quote -

Quote -
If you mean attaching a refract node to the Poser surface and it translates into Lux as glass....it's not working at all. Had to hand edit the material file.

For me the material above computes to the following Lux file (important parts only):

#----->   luxball_new_1/material:glass    <-----

MakeNamedMaterial "luxball_new_1/material:glass" "string type" ["glass"]

"string Kr" ["0.024222943199534778, 1.0, 0.22331043694287706"]

"color Kt" [0.215686276555 0.54509806633 1.0]

"float index" [1.5]

"float cauchyb" [0.20000000298]

"float filmindex" [0.850000023842]

######################

#----->   luxball_new_1/material:glass_1    <-----

MakeNamedMaterial "luxball_new_1/material:glass_1" "string type" ["glossy"]

"color Kd" [0.139313726983 0.139313726983 0.139313726983]

"color Ks" [0.0172058831287 0.0172058831287 0.0172058831287]

"float uroughness" [0.32760295434]

"float vroughness" [0.32760295434]

######################

#----->   luxball_new_1/material    <-----

MakeNamedMaterial "luxball_new_1/material" "string type" ["mix"]

"string namedmaterial1" ["luxball_new_1/material:glass"]

"string namedmaterial2" ["luxball_new_1/material:glass_1"]

"float amount" [0.0]

 

As you can see, the "mix amount" is 0, because Refraction_Value is 1. So the glossy part is ignored.

The colors defined in Poser are assigned to the glass material as follows:

Poser Refraction_Color -> glass Kr
Poser Refraction Node Background -> glass Kt 
Poser Refraction Node Index_of_Refraction -> glass index
Poser Refraction Node Quality -> glass couchyB
Poser Refraction Node Softness -> glass film
Poser Refraction Node Raybias -> glass filmindex

I tried it again using the setting you posted on my test orb (BB's orb object).  I exported using the script you posted as Alpha 1-42.  I opened the material file in a text editor and I do not get the settings you show.

This is what exported:

#----->   Orb_1/Preview    <-----

MakeNamedMaterial "Orb_1/Preview" "string type" ["glossy"]
"color Kd" [0.177745096587 0.177745096587 0.177745096587]
"color Ks" [0.016323530205 0.016323530205 0.016323530205]
"float uroughness" [0.32760295434]
"float vroughness" [0.32760295434]

I do not know what I am not doing correctly. Manually changing the word 'glossy' to 'glass' in the text editor is making it render as glass.

I use poser to make movies only. I render out to a series of ping files. The way I understand it Luxrender keeps working till you tell it to stop. You can’t make movies that way. Will there be settings to render a time line? My main interest in this render engine is that it supports network rendering and I can send my work to  http://www.corefarm.com and get it rendered in a hurry. The prices are within my production budget. I don’t know that there is any other way to export poser animation out to a render farm.

Steve

Quote - The way I understand it Luxrender keeps working till you tell it to stop.

Correct.

Quote - You can’t make movies that way.

Sure you can. Look at the haltspp and halttime parameters in the film section.  You can stop a render after reaching a certain number of (average) samples per pixel, or you can stop after a specified amount of real time has elapsed.

Now, how you get an animation out of Poser and into Luxrender is something I'd like to know...

Got another error for you for LuxPose 1.42, this time it's in Poser 6.

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "", line 68, in ?
  File "C:Program FilesCurious LabsPoser 6RuntimePythonposerScriptsluxrenderworkersBBLuxMat.py", line 37, in ?
    import luxmatic.luxnodes
  File "C:Program FilesCurious LabsPoser 6RuntimePythonposerScriptsluxrenderluxmaticluxnodes.py", line 35, in ?
    class LuxGlossy(LuxMaterial):
  File "C:Program FilesCurious LabsPoser 6RuntimePythonposerScriptsluxrenderluxmaticluxnodes.py", line 38, in LuxGlossy
    Inputs = [
NameError: name 'False' is not defined

I'm going to see if version 7 has the same problem and report back.

Update: Seems pretty minor, but the version that's reported is 1.41 in Poser 7, but it works without giving up an error like Poser 6.

So... anyone have any ideas on how these extra functions work for exporting different materials?

I followed ADP's example from the previous page and tried export on 3 simple spheres. I put a refract on one sphere, and reflect on the next and tried the Poser transluscent chanel on the last sphere.  I opened the material file in a text editor after export and the materials were "glossy". I hand changed the name to "glass" and "metal" respectively and brought the export into Lux and they rendered as glass and metal. I've been waiting to hear from ADP. Perhaps there is some code that still is not working?

Tried it once again. No joy. Had to hand edit the material file for Lux.

Quote - > Quote - The way I understand it Luxrender keeps working till you tell it to stop.

Correct.

Quote - You can’t make movies that way.

Sure you can. Look at the haltspp and halttime parameters in the film section.  You can stop a render after reaching a certain number of (average) samples per pixel, or you can stop after a specified amount of real time has elapsed.

Now, how you get an animation out of Poser and into Luxrender is something I'd like to know...

Thanks for your answer. I noticed there is no mention of animation in the “reality” plug in for Daz Studio. It doesn’t seem that difficult, when I think about it rendering out a movie is like batch rendering, when a program is finished one job it automatically moves on to the next.  A few lines of code and presto you have a movie rendering engine :). I"ll bet you guys will make it happen next year.
Steve

@ ADP, have been playing with version 1.42 and like LatexLuv and ayanematrix have been unable to get the results you posted. Have had a look at the workers folder, is it possible that the compiled versions of PoserLuxExporter_workers and BBLuxMat were not updated in the last package update?

Quote - @ ADP, have been playing with version 1.42 and like LatexLuv and ayanematrix have been unable to get the results you posted. Have had a look at the workers folder, is it possible that the compiled versions of PoserLuxExporter_workers and BBLuxMat were not updated in the last package update?

I'm thinking that's the case. I looked a bit further into the code and some of the export functions relating to metal and glass are not defined specifically, but velvet is. On the plus side, it also appears that using the skin node works too and is mixable with velvet.

Played a bit more, the compiled versions are generated at the time we run the exporter so that's not it. But like you ayanematrix, I found that the code in BBLuxMat has references to skin and velvet and those features are working for me. But can't see any references to glass in BBLuxMat. ADP are you out there...... ;)

So if skin and velvet are working in this update, what nodes in Poser to you use for it to register on export? I've set up a version of BB's VSS to strip textures quickly down to a P4 like set up for Lux Export. If I knew what nodes in Poser to include in my VSS set up then I could take advantage of the skin and velvet support. I truly hope that ADP is looking into the metal/glass thing.

Give him a breather folks...he's been working on this all by himself for a couple weeks now. The guy deserves a rest ;o).

Laurie

Quote - Thanks for your answer. I noticed there is no mention of animation in the “reality” plug in for Daz Studio.

Animation will come in version 2.

Looks up, hey Laurie! :)

Coldrake

Hi coldrake. How the heck are ya? ;o)

Laurie

After a few busy days for my customers out of home I have now some time for the exporter.

To the in-between versions: I tried to find a way to support further nodes with BB's code. But there are to mutch points where I didn't find a way through. So I dropped this and started my own material exporter based on previous work (my old matnodes5 lib). This is more streight forward and better documented (not full, but better, and the code is mostly self-documented because of my programming style). So there is a good chance for others to step in.

My goal is not to convert Poser materials in all cases to generate the same image in Lux as in Poser. But do a useful/usable conversion to have a starting-point ready to add "LuxPose-Material-Macros".  

All other may wait until BB comes back with his exporter version.

With other words: My way is primarily for artists using Poser to "quick-setup" a scene as a target for LuxRender. I try to make the code as abstract as possible to be able to use most of the code for a converter for C4D 12 with Python support.

About animations:
It's not hard to support animations created with Poser. Materials must be exported only once. After this the geometry- and light-converter part must be called for each frame in the scene. But with the actual code it will be slow because LuxRender must be restarted for each frame in the scene.

A better way may be to use "embedded LuxRender" via Lux-Python-API with musltitasking, coverting geometries for the next frame while LuxRender generates the image for the actual frame. But this needs a powerful machine or better network-rendering. Because Poser and LuxRender both must run (and work) on the same machine, sharing cores and memory.

For standard single machines it may be better to export geometries for each frame to a row of files (on a HD with plenty of space) and start the render process thereafter. A special flag for props may help speed up the geometry-generation while exporting static props only once to a kind of macro inserted into each geometry-file. Advantage for the last method is that external render-farms may be used.

If someone wants to start with a framework for animations I happily will help where I can.

A first version with animation support can be downloaded from here:

http://www.poserprofis.de/PoserLuxExporter_alpha_1-42ani.zip

(download tested this time ;) )

Forgotten to mention for the animation output: Number of frames rendered must be changed at the top of the python file: PoserLuxExporter.py

Quote - @ ADP, have been playing with version 1.42 and like LatexLuv and ayanematrix have been unable to get the results you posted. Have had a look at the workers folder, is it possible that the compiled versions of PoserLuxExporter_workers and BBLuxMat were not updated in the last package update?

Compiling is done at runtime. If a *.pyc file is older than the sourcefile the *.py file is compiled automaticly. If you're in doubt just remove all *.pyc files.

Quote - I'm thinking that's the case. I looked a bit further into the code and some of the export functions relating to metal and glass are not defined specifically, but velvet is. On the plus side, it also appears that using the skin node works too and is mixable with velvet.

Basic material is always a matte or glossy. But if there is a "Fraction" node in you material, a mix out of glossy and glass is created. If you have pur glass, the mix-amount is (should be) zero, so the glossy-part is completly ignored (theoretically :) ).

Quote - Forgotten to mention for the animation output: Number of frames rendered must be changed at the top of the python file: PoserLuxExporter.py

you forgot to add the frame counter to the filename, if you render several frames they overwrite the last one

Not in my version :)

If more than one frame must be exported, a folder named "ani" is created to store the output. All files, with added framenumbers, are generated in this folder.

sorry i was not very precise (miss a morning coffee), i speak of the filename for the output image in my case it's testanim.png  in all  lxs files, in place of testanin00000.png to testanim00030.png

Quote - sorry i was not very precise (miss a morning coffee), i speak of the filename for the output image in my case it's testanim.png  in all  lxs files, in place of testanin00000.png to testanim00030.png

Ohhh yes! I'll make an update!

Images for animations have now the correct filename.

** http://www.poserprofis.de/PoserLuxExporter_alpha_1-42a_ani.zip** 

can someone show me what materials in poser should i use to get in lux glossy materials for metal,flooring,skin,plastic.

thank you.

 Hey,

Officially released v0.7.1! on Sunday :)

Here: >>>>Luxrender<<<<

Quote -  Hey,
Officially released v0.7.1! on Sunday :)

Here: >>>>Luxrender<<<<

''lease note that both v0.7 and this new v0.7.1 might exhibit surges of fireflies on certain scenes. We've not been able to track down the issue''

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

: - ) 

Quote - > Quote -  Hey,

Officially released v0.7.1! on Sunday :)

Here: >>>>Luxrender<<<<

''Please note that both v0.7 and this new v0.7.1 might exhibit surges of fireflies on certain scenes. We've not been able to track down the issue''

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

: - ) 

The good part of that statement is that he confirms that v0.8 test builds do not display the fireflies problem. :)

Quote - > Quote - > Quote -  Hey,

Officially released v0.7.1! on Sunday :)

Here: >>>>Luxrender<<<<

''Please note that both v0.7 and this new v0.7.1 might exhibit surges of fireflies on certain scenes. We've not been able to track down the issue''

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

: - ) 

The good part of that statement is that he confirms that v0.8 test builds do not display the fireflies problem. :)

i already used the 0.8 builds and the fireflies are still there.

so they didnt fix it.

not what they are stating. I'd go with their take since they're the ones working on it over yours.

then my fireflies problem are part of my computer problem correct?

or do you think that i made this up?

frankly, I think your not setting things up right, you don't read the thread for the information you want and expect others to find it for you.

The other thing to keep in mind is what a lot of people call fireflies, are not fireflies at all.  If the specks are small white specks, they are not fireflies.  Fireflies are usually red, and very large.  They can be white, but they will be larger than normal.  Also, they grow in number over time, usually bunched together. 

This isn't to say that you don't have them, but be sure they are fireflies first.

Quote - frankly, I think your not setting things up right, you don't read the thread for the information you want and expect others to find it for you.

i get fireflies when rendering with LuxBlend. this is the blender script for luxrendering.

i did everything like on the Lux forum and i get fireflies with a soft sun and glossy materials.

Quote - The other thing to keep in mind is what a lot of people call fireflies, are not fireflies at all.  If the specks are small white specks, they are not fireflies.  Fireflies are usually red, and very large.  They can be white, but they will be larger than normal.  Also, they grow in number over time, usually bunched together. 

This isn't to say that you don't have them, but be sure they are fireflies first.

at 4 hours i had more sharp bright (green,blue) spots then at 2 hours.they were blue and green because i had a red and green sofa in my room with glossy materials.i dont always get fireflies.95% time with interior rendering.

they will fix the problem . not a complaint. after all this is all free and open source.

I'm curious:  For those having firefly problems, which integrator are you using?

If you're still getting excessive fireflies that don't go away after a few hours you should experiment with other surface integrators and change the pixel filter to gaussian.

I had a scene this weekend which wouldn't clean up, even after 8 hours, I switched the surface integrator from 'distributed path' to 'direct lighting' and the scene cleared up completely in 2 hours.

Quote - If you're still getting excessive fireflies that don't go away after a few hours you should experiment with other surface integrators and change the pixel filter to gaussian.

I had a scene this weekend which wouldn't clean up, even after 8 hours, I switched the surface integrator from 'distributed path' to 'direct lighting' and the scene cleared up completely in 2 hours.

Of course it did. The direct lighting integrator is the same as Poser 7 - straight up plain old raytracing camera to surface to light. There is no bounced secondary light in that model. The fireflies are bugs in the bounced light from surface to surface. That's why they talk about decreasing the kD and kS values. All that does is make them less likely - but they still happen.

Don't confuse grain with fireflies. Grain clears up with more samples. Fireflies don't. They're anomalous extreme values that end up in the accumulation buffer and cannot be overwhelmed back to normal even with 10,000 samples. Just as one set clears up, another is created. And if you get just 1 that has a luminance of 1 billion, that will very shortly bounce around and create a few hundred more at .5 billion luminance. It goes downhill from there.

Luxrender 0.8 build from last week . i used all the glossy settings under 0.4. diffuse is under 0.8. metropolis/bidirectonal

fireflies ;) 

Quote - Luxrender 0.8 build from last week . i used all the glossy settings under 0.4. diffuse is under 0.8. metropolis/bidirectonal

fireflies ;) 

Did you set a portal for the sunlight?

yes there is a portal on every window.

 I'm not sure if those bright spots are indicating a bug in the program - they just look like typical monte carlo noise to me.

bevelie me its not.after 4-7 hours all the nose is going away but those fieflies dont change. they dont get smaller .

any new renders?

Rendered with the 7.1 release of luxrender, forced to use 'direct lighting' integrator, everything else got spoiled by fireflies.

Lights used: 1 red point light for the fire glow in the blast hole.

Green ambient light from the glass on the canister.

White ambient lights from the corridor's overhead fluorescents.

Finished off by a low value 'bloom' lens effect.

Skin is a straight export from Poser, no tweaking or mixing in mattetranslucent. No C.C. subdivision.

A new weekly v0.8 luxrender was released yesterday, so I'm going to re-render the scene using that version.

Unfortunately I cannot use the most recent build. There is not a non-openCL version.

Actually my first post in the forums here. These two do both have some PS treatment, mostly because  it was intended as a personal final work comparison, so my apologies for that.

Still, the blue one is an old piece I finished some months ago in Poser. Today I though it's about time I tried lux so I took that scene with only lowering the backlight intensity from 200% to 75% (else it was way too strong for lux), used the script and rendered ~8 hours overnight.

There are also a few model improvements I tested out but all that hardly matters. Mats and lights are the same and  all I have to say is, I'm impressed.

So I guess this is my odd way of thanking all of you guys for the time and effort you've put into this. I'm very happy to have tried it.

Very nice! :)

Laurie

I know i shouldn't ask this, but i have been wondering whether this project has died.  I know Bagginsbill had said he would be busy, but his time would free up in October, and ADP hasn't been around for a while; although it could be he is on a much deserved vacation.

Anyway, just curious.

I hope it hasn't died. That would be unfortunate.

Laurie

Nope not dead. But the company I work for pulled resources off my project leaving me to work alone. This made it take longer, and also made it all about me. I'm working 70 hours a week and I'm going to fall over soon.

I take time here and there to answer questions but work on the next stage of Luxpose is beyond a few minutes here and there.

I keep wanting to work on it but it's overwhelming. There are a bunch of new components that have to be added to the GUI in order to do the interactive material editing. That's a tough nut to crack as a distracted background task.