@richardson it's my first render, i discover poser ...

So there are cynicals in France too? It's not what I asked. I throw away most of what I do. I know you make your point about mirrored blur but, is that really what it looks like? If I do a test , I will get this?

Hi Operaguy No poser Lights- an HDRI applied to BB envirosphere, IDL. That's it. Shadows from IDL.

Quote - eric, on your render with the Mec4D hair....

do you have any poser lights in the scene? another way to ask is: are the shadows cast by the hair on the face being generated from IDL?

::::: Opera :::::

Looking good. If you dig back through the RDNA forum history-you'll find Kleanzlate (Vestmann) had the teeth shader set up that is used in Ezskin-I have/had a slightly different solution that also works quite well. I'm pretty sure RHarwood (SnarlyGribbly) went with Kleanzlate's version rather than mine. http://forum.runtimedna.com/showthread.php?65244-SSS-Attempting-realistic-teeth-comments-please!-Suggestions-welcome!

Quote - I've never got teeth to behave quite this nicely. I ran BB's new nodes over EZ and cloned Lip material onto innermouth. So, similar specular and bump maps settings(swapped out the maps). The idl effect and reflection is good I think. Just one emitter here. This is V4hi

Looks better OperaGuy I've not been able to get Poser Strand hair to look right with IDL only. Done with Dublin! Not me. My current favorite she is. :-)

Quote -  

[click for full]

this is strictly a hair study. the scene is a little overlighted/blown out, as seen at the base of her back.

I could not get this far with strand hair with only emitters; I had to put a spot on her hair with raytrace, shadow blurr radius 1, samples 19. The intensity is low: 22%

Also, the render settings are totally cranked: Brute Force 100% IC with 3 raytrace bounces, indirect light quality 100%, pixel samples 36, min shading rate .21

Took about 4 hours, mostly because of raytrace on 16,000 strands of hair with zero clumpiness.

I am happy with the hair, although the shadows at the bottom are a little muddy. I'm going to change skins, however, as the red-cheeked Dublin is not to my liking anymore.

::::: Opera :::::

Quote - Hi Operaguy No poser Lights- an HDRI applied to BB envirosphere, IDL. That's it. Shadows from IDL. BTW: the strand hair is for Genesis- I exported it as a cr2 and Obj from Daz3d. I think it looks a bit better in DS > Quote - eric, on your render with the Mec4D hair....

do you have any poser lights in the scene? another way to ask is: are the shadows cast by the hair on the face being generated from IDL?

::::: Opera :::::

this is strictly a hair study.

This already looks better than previous spotty result. I guess because of your higher setting and light. The specular  (I think) needs to be reduced or broken up some more. I'll admit, I'm way behind on strand hair or hair nodes in general. So I have no fixes. Colors are great though. I'm trying not to get into a big hair study. Strand does seem to behave better with shadows.

[click for full]

Post Process: added background, pulled the brightness and contrast, eradicated Dublin's too-red cheeks.

:: og ::

It seems that black is the popular specular colour, which doesn't make theoretical sense to me with my limited knowledge... but something like that is all that seems to work. I've tried white specular and the hair always turns gray or platinum; I've tried a later tint of the main hair colour and end up with something far away from what I want as well. (That's the case in the image here: the hair tip and root colours are set to dark brown, but the tint variation I used for specular overpowers the hair and makes it look pretty much blonde.)

Is black really the proper choice?

Black is 0 - when you amplify anything with black it is 0. No effect. Off. Disabled.

In other words, all those renders have no specular at all. LOL.

That does tell me that Poser's material settings are way off though, at least when it comes to hair strands.

It looks to me like you need to set the specular colour to the main target colour you want, and the tip and root colours even darker. But that doesn't seem right at all.

Okay, newb question, I've got some renders I would like to show you all, but I can't figure out how to post them in the thread...?  

A couple inches below the Reply box is an Attach a File box. Or, if your images is hosted elsewhere (e.g. in the Gallery) you can use the Insert/Edit Image icon at the upper right of the Reply box.

Rendered in Poser Pro 2012, illuminated by ambient frames and a sphere...

Using the VSS skin shader BB posted a few pages back...

(btw, I can't figure out how to actually use VSS, I ended up having to apply the material to each material zone and loading the image maps into the proper nodes...)

(Is there a way to post more than one image at a time with the attachments?)

shaders on strand hair do not react the same way with only emitters as they do under poser spot lights. I always put a raytrace shadow into the spot.

Wish I could be more specific, but I can't. When I was getting illogical results, I just gave in and added the spot, which I call the "hair-spot" now.

::::: Opera :::::

Iris scanner SUX 3000

How am I doing?

You seem to be on it. I like that your emitters are meant to be visible.

Richarson or BB or anyone: can you put into words the main advantages for using BB's eye prop, especially in contrast to the V4 eye system.

Thanks   :: og ::

From what I've seen, BBeye has combined V4's sclera, iris and pupil into one material. And instead of a cornea andeyesurface material there is a separate "cover". Getting the cornea/eyesurface to play nice was hard for most to grasp so most made "eyesurface" invisible and put reflection on the cornea. But,, this makes it hard to get a smooth transition between sclera and cornea with reflection.BB's "cover" is good for reflections. And it can be shifted unlike V4's "eyesurface".

The other reason is the refraction of lens issue and scale and artifacts between the surfaces which is another long winded story. Nobody seems to mess with it anymore. Don't know if there are morphs for BBeye, though. iris size, dilate, etc..

"overload"..LOL yup. got that tshirt

ok, i grokked some of that. thanks. that's all i need for the moment (overload!)

V4 with textures and shaders by Danae (Lyon SSS). Good stuff but not prepared for pure IDL lighting.

One eye is the BBEye (with Diffuse replaced with Scatter - a trivial edit.)

Which is which?

I did some more work on the BBEye - I now have a Python script that automatically loads, scales and positions two BB eyes and covers over many figures and hides the original eyes.

When I have time, I will put it in the store - but I have so little time.

If I could trust that people would read readme's and put up with potential problems and learn what to do and not do, I'd put it up now, but that's not common.

@Anthanasius: it's no bug.

Quote - @richardson it's my first render, i discover poser ...

So there are cynicals in France too? It's not what I asked. I throw away most of what I do. I know you make your point about mirrored blur but, is that really what it looks like? If I do a test , I will get this?

Yes.

Raytrace mirrored= no motion blur, non shadow motion blur, no Smooth polygone, no  interpolation displacement, etc

Quote - So we've been talking about large emitters and how that limits your options for tighter highlights and shadows.

I'm playing with SR3 and did an overnight render, which actually finished in 3 hours 10 minutes.

The block floating over the scene is not light-bulb size, but it is pretty small - about the size of one of the chests. It's ambient value is 60. I arrived at this number after directly photographing a light bulb and comparing its radiance (is that the right word?) to the objects it was illuminating. It required an exposure 60 times smaller to photograph the bulb into a similar photographed brightness as the other stuff in the room. (Which means that real-life diffuse value is around 1/60!!!)

Usually, something that small and hot would splotch the heck out of the render. But this was without IC.

There is some noise on the back-left wall - need more samples. I did this with 5000 samples. Probably need 20000 samples and take around 12 hours.

Seems we're getting into LuxRender territory.

Great!bagginsbill

BBEye on M4.

* "I hope by now that everybody knows how to say "Fresnel effect"."*

That's pronounced fray-NEL right?

That's a beautiful left eye BB. Actually it is magnificent.

Is the procedural shader with FrayNel included in the current Zip of your EyeProp at your site?

::::: Opera :::::

Yep.

My solution was a separate cover prop, and then turn of cast shadows for that. Thus the iris is fully lit even though completely covered.

Yes.

Raytrace mirrored= no motion blur, non shadow motion blur, no Smooth polygone, no  interpolation displacement, etc

Ummm, so we are to stop all proceedings until this is fixed? Or, is there something else going on? Sorry but I don't understand this line of reasoning. Poser has been full of quirks since I got P5. That's part of the fun if you ask me.

I could buy better software. But then I'd have to be an artist, and what's the point of that?

snort    ;) Better stick with the nodes bb. It's a jungle out there.

My latest fresnel settings were at 1.46ior. Not as nice as I had earlier. I failed to save again.

From the PP2012 manual - "SSS only works on objects that are in direct view of the camera. Objects in reflected surfaces will not be calculated with proper SSS". So I did a quick test with blurred reflection on a sphere prop and a reflective lens prop, and when rendered the sphere reflection is perfectly sharp. So I would assume that what is true of SSS is also true of blurred reflections and 3D motion blur.

Given that Poser is a biased renderer and doesn't do physically accurate calculations in the way that unbiased renderers like Lux or Octane do, I would call this a limitation, not a bug.

Great thread. Haven't played with light emitters before so think it's time I started ....

Personally I'm loving the emiiter approach.  The thing I can gather, is that it is definitely not for every day use.  Just like everything else in this CG world, it's situational to the scene you are creating.  I find now that I am trying the traditional approach as well as this emitter technique and just going with what works best for the needs of the scene.

On this one, the emitters gave the right shadows for what I wanted.  Two emitters, one squared for fill, one rounded for main lighting and shadowing, opposite corners .  Envosphere with hdr image to help with reflections.

Nudity Advise:

Quote - I designed the separate cover for the cornea because we want to use refraction, not transparency. But - without transparency, the cornea shadows the iris and so the iris gets no light.

My solution was a separate cover prop, and then turn of cast shadows for that. Thus the iris is fully lit even though completely covered.

OMG!  I LOVE that eyeball!  I gots to start playing with that.  Great idea BB!

Quote - Yes.

Raytrace mirrored= no motion blur, non shadow motion blur, no Smooth polygone, no  interpolation displacement, etc

 

Ummm, so we are to stop all proceedings until this is fixed? Or, is there something else going on? Sorry but I don't understand this line of reasoning. Poser has been full of quirks since I got P5. That's part of the fun if you ask me.

No, just a tool's limitation.

Quote - I could buy better software. But then I'd have to be an artist, and what's the point of that?

Huh, what the "art's tools"?

No?

poser?

Daz?

3dsmax?

Cinema4D and Poserfusion?

IDL, raytrace?

Calm, it's just a typical limitation ("reyes" render type), sometimes annoying;)

No, just a tool's limitation.

Exactly. Glad you came back. If we had everything, we wouldn't  find anything.

Quote - No, just a tool's limitation.

 

Exactly. Glad you came back. If we had everything, we wouldn't  find anything.

Ho, It's my fault, I'm bad in English, sorry.

those eyes look very good, bill.  I won't ask any questions, but see if the beta testers say anything about the glaucoma effect.  they may not see it if they're using directional lights rather than diffuse emitters.

Can someone show the simplest blinn fresnel reflect node material set up?

[click for full]

Ok, this is extreme lighting and no apology; I love shots like this! Even if the bump is a little much.

I wanted to see the effect of GI inside the mouth. Pretty cool. Looking at it enlarged you can see SSS on the inside cheeks.

::::: Opera :::::

Can someone show the simplest blinn fresnel reflect node material set up?

It's actually posted up a few pages back.

Pretty cool. Looking at it enlarged you can see SSS on the inside cheeks.

It's kinda fun seeing this. You remember V3 teeth or "chicklets" some called them? Try proceedural bump from EZ if this is not a good map.You;ll want to get a bump with nice vertical creases for the lips, though.

OK thanks, I must have seen it and not understood it, I'll read closely again and see if I can pick it up.

 "Fresnel Effect!" :-)

The BBeye is nice indeed.

Quote - I hope by now that everybody knows how to say "Fresnel effect".

 

 Fun! And I DEMAND an apology for the extreme lighting. Clearly your flashlight goes all the way to 11! :-) Hurry give me an averaged out, bland Poser 4 light.

Quote -  

[click for full]

Ok, this is extreme lighting and no apology; I love shots like this! Even if the bump is a little much.

I wanted to see the effect of GI inside the mouth. Pretty cool. Looking at it enlarged you can see SSS on the inside cheeks.

::::: Opera :::::

 Looks good overall. If you are using PPro2012 you'd get much better results using SSS via EZskin (which uses BB's version of skin SSS). It is very easy to use!

Quote - How am I doing?

Rendered in Poser Pro 2012, illuminated by ambient frames and a sphere...

Using the VSS skin shader BB posted a few pages back...

(btw, I can't figure out how to actually use VSS, I ended up having to apply the material to each material zone and loading the image maps into the proper nodes...)

(Is there a way to post more than one image at a time with the attachments?)

another inside shot, this time the pearlessence/translucence/reflection on the teeth is better.

:: og ::

The tongue looks excellent, opera. The teeth are great too, just a bit too "innocent."

It's a pity that extreme close-ups of skin are now realistic but trans-mapped eyelashes don't hold up. Polygonal eyelashes are possible at around 25,000 polygons. Is it worth it?

I would think that in theory, eyelashes could be grown in the Hair Room....

I would think that in theory, eyelashes could be grown in the Hair Room....

That's a good idea. I wonder why no one does that. (Maybe I'll be the first.)

Probably would need a standalone prop.. I don't think you can get a narrow enough strip of mesh on the figures themselves. If someone else has thought of it, they probably considered it too much work for possibly too little payoff, I guess.

There's also the consideration of makeup. With the transmapped eyelases you can trade out texture and mess with the material settings. You couldn't do that with the Hair Room.