If you have any questions about the script, please post em here and we'll try and answer them to the best of our ability ;-).

Thanks

Laurie

What would be the best settings in a shader for a figure or prop? What nodes should be left out eg. on a skin shader to get the best results? I don't just want to export my scene with extra nodes that is just going to complicate the render or have no effect. Is there perhaps a tutorial on what is the best node set up in poser if used for pose2lux export?

You're better off with simple, Poser 4 style shader setups. Because Poser shaders won't transfer over to Luxrender, it doesn't matter to the exporter what your Poser shader setups are since you will need to change them to something Luxrender uses and understands. Because the exporter doesn't really understand nodes attached to Alt Diffuse and Alt Specular, those are best left empty. It can always be overridden in the script though. Also, you might want to make sure that ambience is turned off on any material zone that you don't want to glow ;o). The exporter sees ambience as a light source and will make that material an emitter. This too can also be adjusted directly in the exporter on the emitters panel.

We finished the draft of the User Guide, so that should be coming soon when everything's been finalized and there's no glaring boo-boos :o).

Laurie

I intend for a future version of Pose2Lux to make use of the Poser Skin node. The skin node has seen little use because Bagginsbill and others have shown us how to get much better results using sophisticated shaders. However, it could be the ideal node for use in scenes which are intended to be rendered in Lux!

Here is a simple P4 style shader rendered in Lux.

cool thanks

I'm going to make this a sticky  :biggrin:

but am getting the hang now I think

so my Q?   worked out how to add paths but how many?? does it only work on one at a time or can I load all my tex paths etc?? (guess most have multiple runtimes nowadays)

I just set mine to my external runtimes folder, which contains ALL my runtimes ;)...hehe. So far, Luxrender has been able to find everything ;).

As for your glowing skin problem, most skin texture poses have ambience in them. It's always a good idea to double check the emitters panel and make sure none of your skin textures are going to be giving off light and set them to be ignored. You can also set all ambience in the entire scene to be ignored with the button. Only use that if you don't have any valid emitter light sources.

IMVHO, emitters give off a much more pleasing light with softer shadows than actual lights do. But that may just be personal preference ;). That excludes the sun of course.

Laurie

You don't need to make any reference to the textures used in your scenes - the paths to them are picked up automatically by Pose2Lux.

The 'Textures' path that can be set on the Pose2Lux 'Paths' screen is for a different purpose and only needs to refer to a single folder. It is there to identify the location of any textures that a Lux material might need but which are not already present in your scene.

No Lux materials using this feature have been distributed with Pose2Lux yet so you can probably ignore it for now - it may become more relevant in the future.

The other folder locations that can be set also have set uses:

Material libraries: The location of your Pose2Lux material collections in XML format

Automatically load...: As above, but will be automatically loaded when Pose2Lux runs

Scene materials: Default location for files saved via the 'File/Save scene materials' menu

Tabbed data files: Statistical tables and lookup files used by certain Luxrender materials. None have been distributed with Pose2Lux yet.

lol never thought of setting it that high in the folder tree,  thank you

Well, according to Snarly, we don't need to link to our textures folder. I wasn't sure that's what it was for either, but I set it anyway just in case.

What really happens is, if Poser knows where the texture is, then so does the exporter and therefore, Luxrender (unless you move it between the time you exported and the time you render the export file).

Laurie

Quote - I'm going to make this a sticky  :biggrin:

Thanks Kim :)

Laurie

Any hint on how many samples/pixel you usually have to accumulate for renders? yesterday night I made my first try and after 100 S/p there were only a few dozen wrong pixels around (which might have been fixed manually with GIMP).

Dear Snarlygribbly, you rock :thumbupboth:.

Also I see some of the renders have DOF. Is that post work or just focal settings in poser? Does pose2lux register Dof and focal settings if set in poser?

DoF is done in Pose2Lux.

On the camera screen there is a checkbox to enable Depth of Field. When checked Pose2Lux will automatically calculate and set the correct parameters in the Lux scene file to emulate the same DOF effect you would get if you were using a 35mm SLR.

Pose2Lux uses the following information for DoF:

1. Focus distance: set in POSER, using the camera's parameter dial 'focus distance'

2. Focal length: set in POSER, again using the camera's parameter dial of the same name.

3. fStop, set in POSE2LUX (i.e. overriding the Poser camera's setting of the same name)

While all three of these combine to determine the exact Dof Effect, the fStop setting has the most influence. Choose a wide aperture (low fStop number) for a strong DoF effect.

Note that you will still be able to change the fStop value in Lux while it's rendering without affecting the DoF - the calculations for DoF are made at the point of export and not affectedby any subsequent change in Lux.

Quote - Any hint on how many samples/pixel you usually have to accumulate for renders? yesterday night I made my first try and after 100 S/p there were only a few dozen wrong pixels around (which might have been fixed manually with GIMP).

Dear Snarlygribbly, you rock :thumbupboth:.

I recommend 250 S/p for a 'preview render' and maybe around 2, 500 S/p for a final render. However, there is no right answer for this - it will vary considerably from one scene to another and your eyes will be the best judge of when it's ready.

And thanks :-)

Can someone give some pointers on setting up a primitive to use as an emitter, for example a ball as a light source to look as if a lamp is turned on. And how it should be set up in poser. And does it make a difference on the size of the object and how much light it will emit? Also, should it be transparent etc?  (Hope this makes sense! lol) Newbie with this, can ya tell!  Thanks

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=2172914

The shades are also emitters, albeit with much less power. I set them up the same in Poser tho with just the texture map in the diffuse channel, ambient set to 1.0 (white) and using the Matte material in the exporter. You can always change the power of the emitter within Luxrender itself, as well as the color.

Oh, and no trans on either the shade or the bulb ;).

Laurie

Thanks for the info Laurie, I will mess with it some tomorrow ;o)

Is the source available (or will it be)?

The source code is not yet available, but I think ultimately it would be good for the project if it was.

There are two reasons why it is not yet available.

1. My programming is embarrassingly bad. I'm a photographer, not a programmer, and it shows :-) When I compare my code to the stuff others are doing around here, people who know what they're doing, it's all very humbling. At the moment, I'd rather walk naked down the High Street than show anybody my coding efforts!

2. I don't want this project to branch at an early stage. This happened with the LuxPose project and regardless of the merits of the different versions that were available, the split was detrimental to the success of the project. Keeping the source code to myself means I can keep this project on track until Pose2Lux is sufficiently well established that it can survive any possible branches.

So, if Pose2Lux becomes well enough established and I can overcome my embarrassment then yes, the source code will be made available.

Until then, I think it's best left the way it is.

Funny how your "bad" code seems to work...lol.

Laurie

Almost 25 years of professional software development experience taught me a thing about commercial code "quality": code is like sausages; better not look into it or ask how it is done, so dear Snarlygribbly, don't worry .

How is it recommanded, to set up the Eyelash mat.zone of V4 in Poser (P2010), for an export?

Leave it with the Transperancy and Tr._Edge set to 1, with the Image_Map plugged in, into these channels?

Or using Diffuse?

Leave your eyelashes with the diffuse color and/or map and transparencey in Poser as it is. In the exporter, use "Matte" as the Luxrender material.

Laurie

K, thanks Laurie

Laurie, I downloaded your Lux XML materials, but I can't figure out how to get them into Pose2Lux :( I tried setting the path in the materials library, but it still doesn't show up in Pose2Lux. Am I doing it wrong? I have a folder on my desktop with your xml and pointed to that. Thanks

On the paths screen, the top two fields: the first is where the exporter will first look for .xml material files. The second is where the script will automatically load them from. If you want any .xml files to load automatically, the path at least must be in that second field. Any .xml files inside the folder that you reference in that field will load on opening.

It's in the user guide, page 17.

Laurie

Ok, Thanks Laurie, I will try again :)

That worked :) Thanks Laurie!

Quote - The source code is not yet available, but I think ultimately it would be good for the project if it was.There are two reasons why it is not yet available. 1) My programming is embarrassingly bad. I'm a photographer, not a programmer, and it shows :-) When I compare my code to the stuff others are doing around here, people who know what they're doing, it's all very humbling. At the moment, I'd rather walk naked down the High Street than show anybody my coding efforts!

1. I don't want this project to branch at an early stage. This happened with the LuxPose project and regardless of the merits of the different versions that were available, the split was detrimental to the success of the project. Keeping the source code to myself means I can keep this project on track until Pose2Lux is sufficiently well established that it can survive any possible branches.

So, if Pose2Lux becomes well enough established and I can overcome my embarrassment then yes, the source code will be made available.

Until then, I think it's best left the way it is.

I can sympathise with that. I wrote a VBA-based (Excel) material-management thingie for the department that I work at (post-op recovery) and whilst the thing is clean (in terms of it doesn't crash and does what it is supposed to) and seems to work pretty consistently, I'd hate for anyone to see the code. I'm a nurse, and learned VB just sort-of on the side, so my code is pretty ordinary.

That said, I've been using Pose2Lux pretty much every day, Snarly - really getting into it, and I have to say: good ON ya for pulling the sled to the finish line, getting the thing to a usable state, which indeed it is. Sure, there'll be issues, but at the moment, you can bask in the knowledge that you have quite a few users that appreciate what you've done. Enormously.

And to the brilliant coders that did do the bulk of the code before-hand: it is a pleasure and an honour to enjoy the fruits of your hard labour on this. You've done exceedingly well! This is a great app in terms of facillitating Poser users to finally break free from the constraints of SM's choice in render engines.

I think one of the best by-products of this is that people are finally looking at materials differently, more critically. This is a good thing. No longer will we simply accept what is given us by a vendor: if you want to render in something other than Firefly, you'll be forced to re-evaluate scene materials, and gibberish workflow will be one of the first casualties.

YAY! :woot:

Okay, a bit of a question: not sure what I'm doing wrong. I apologise if this was covered in the main Pose2Lux thread or somewhere before that. I'm using Daz's Conservatory as a building prop thingie, and the structure is coming out all distorted:

So, I've gone into each and every part of the structure and set Smooth Polygons off (unticked). Is there something else I should have done? Crease angle is set to 80. Displacement bounds: 0. Shading rate: 0.20. Oh, and I unticked Bend (the tickbox under 'Visible').

Any ideas?

You're subdividing in the exporter aren't you? I haven't been able to get any of the subdivision methods to keep the sharp edges on the props. I don't use them for now ;). Feel free to subdivide a figure, but I'd hold off on subdividing the props for now.

Even with the bad smoothing, the lighting on that image looks great! :D

Laurie

Oh, um, no. This will teach me to real your fine manual before asking stupid questions, Laurie. So, printing it out and talking my tiny head (filled with a nasty cold) back to bed for a read and a think.

Thanks for replying nicely, Laurie. And for the nice comment on the lighting, which (as you said earlier) is ever so much fun to play with!

wow, does that model look like that in Poser then? Eek!

Laurie

Actually no. it looks like:

I do like the LuxR lighting better, even at that stage of the render...

I'm home sniffing and dripping and feeling annoying, so I'm sorry about the dumb questions. In the LuxRender wiki on rendering, it says something about:

"First, keep reflectance (i.e. brightness) in diffuse components of your materials below 0.8 or so. While this will not affect rendering speed directly, your image will de-noise much faster. On the same note, avoid using specular colors higher than .25 or so, and reflection color on glass and metal materials should be kept below .8 as well. If this makes your scene too dim, simply adjust the tonemapping to expose it more."

Okay, so is this .25 meant to be the value in Specular_Value?

Well, if you always check "Use Scaling" on the export panel, you won't need to worry about that ;). Snarly did that so that no specular would be too bright and cause fireflies.

And as for your building, I  have no idea what's happening there. It still looks to me like you might be using subdivision in the exporter. Double-check that you didn't save any settings with subdivision on next time you try and export that. Check that panel ;). That shouldn't be happening on it's own like that. If if had that building I'd test it out for you but I don't have it ;). Sorry.

Laurie

Um, I have no subdivision for anything in that Geometry section (just went with default values). So, calculate normals for figures and ...for  Props are both ticked. Trying again.

Okay, so that didn't work. Now, I selected the items I wanted to have subdivided in the materials section, then went to Tools and clicked "Add Parameters to current Actor only. No difference.

So, now I'm gonna bring this dodgy geometry into Blender and have a go fixing it so it works right.

Does it use displacement?  I had some weird things going on until I removed the displacement map.

Sure does... I'll fix that and get back to you. Thanks, J Cleaver!

You can ignore all displacement in the scene thru the exporter. Just check the checkbox.

Laurie

Thanks for that tip, Laurie... so that is what that's for.

I have found that scene prep is a key part of this, which really is a good thing. You gain some valuable info (and a strong sense of ownership) of the components of your scene. Oh, and the really cool thing about all this is it's sort-of preparing us for exporting to other renderers as well. "WHAT, other than *Lux??!?" you exclaim. :blink: Well, sheesh, why not? Lux is awesome and all that, but Vue beckons, and so does Octane and-and-and... :biggrin:

BTW, JCleaver, that fixed it. Rendering beautifully now. Get back to you sometime tomorrow with the final product... unless I find something else to quibble over.

Just a quick note: the subdivision that my part of the code does is, unfortunately, an all or nothing business right now. It doesn't have the ability to preserve creases and, if I remember right, it ignores smoothing groups, as well. Luxrender's subdivision on the other hand can preserve creases, but it will open up textures seams and actor boundaries because there was some trickery required in overcoming its limited mesh model.

I haven't looked at the changes between 0.7 and 0.8 yet, though. It's entirely possibly that we could do away with that trickery by now and simply use Luxrender's own subdivision.

I even get bad results with Luxrender's subdivision odf. It doesn't seem to matter which one I use ;). It smooths my corners...lol. Good thing is that most things are ok as they are and don't look too bad when rendered :o).

Laurie

Quote - I even get bad results with Luxrender's subdivision odf. It doesn't seem to matter which one I use ;). It smooths my corners...lol. Good thing is that most things are ok as they are and don't look too bad when rendered :o).

Laurie

I seem to remember that there was an option to preserve creases, but I don't know if Pose2Lux makes any attempt at using it at this point.

Well, Snarly assured me it would because your code is virtually unchanged from LuxPose and I remember it working then, but I'm not having any luck recently ;). Maybe after he releases the final and the code you can give it the once over for your own peace of mind, at least enough to see if something got switched on or off....lol.

For me, subdivision hasn't become a big issue - yet ;). I use it more for figures than for props normally.

Laurie

Well, as soon as this render goes past the pixellated-look stage, I'll do a quick save so you can see. The edges on the edge of the building and doors and stuff seem satisfactorially crisp and everything.

I've been looking through the list of materials you've offered, Laurie... great stuff! Is there a call for things like marble or granite or anything like that? Or have they already been developed? Oh, and are any specular types like anisotropic or Blinn ever going to be supported?

Also, I've looked at say a given material and noticed that the PoserSurface node appears to be represented in the list of "channels" in Pose2Lux. I understand that prepping a scene (actors) for Lux, you sort-of want to stay away from anything that used to plug into the PoserSurface Alt_Diffuse and Alt_Spec channel, which I take it to mean: avoid like Add() nodes between your ColourMap and the PoserSurface diffuse_color channel. But, do these Poser2Lux alt_diffuse and alt_specular channels actually accept input at this stage? I guess the reason I'm asking is because of a sense for how the diffuse_color and specular_color channels actually have a hidden function where they do maths with the scene lights... I'd prefer to be plugging into Alt_Diffuse. But then, I guess you'd need a Diffuse() node, hey? Or is that only for Firefly?

I know, messy question. Promise I'll be tidier next time. I might go ahead and test all that, if you want... if no one has already tried this.

Quote - Well, Snarly assured me it would because your code is virtually unchanged from LuxPose and I remember it working then, but I'm not having any luck recently ;).

Writing out the subdivision options for Lux is not part of my code, though.

[techno]

The GeometryExporter constructor takes an optional argument "write_mesh_parameters", which is a function. That function is responsible for setting whatever special parameters the caller needs to set for the particular mesh. As far as I can see, I haven't written any code that defines that function, so that would have been done somewhere in LuxPose.

[/techno]

Oh, I know odf, but he included both yours and Luxrender's in the exporter :).

Ah, maybe one of the other gents changed something then? I could have sworn it was working without smoothing corners at some point. But then, my memory can be really dodgy at times ;).

Laurie