Ah well, the image violated the rendo TOS for hand contact with genitals (i.e., the woman is covering her genitals in the image) and hence was deleted. If you're curious... 

...or walk into just about any large record store (if they still exist) or Itunes. I think the last time that image was censored was sometime in the 1970's.

I'm no use in this thread because I preferred http://www.isdal.dk/images/CD_covers/R/ROX_Foryourpleasure.jpg

(OT: And http://www.isdal.dk/images/CD_covers/R/ROX_Manifesto.jpg looks strangely like a monkeycloud render...)

Ummm, anyway.

he-he.

That "For Your Pleasure"  cover too indeed ;-) Damn, I didn't realise I was so subliminally inspired by Roxy Music cover art... he he.

This is W4 WM with Mike 2010's Norah morph and Maelwen's Emma texture.  The background HDRI is today's Advent Calender present at 3D World on BB's Envirosphere.....

Quote - he-he.

Hahahahahaha!!!

Quote - Well, to me they all look pretty 'poserish' with just some variations of specularity. Not too convincing and - yes indeed on the fake, plastic-looking side, if you ask me.

"Keep in mind. I hate dry skin, wax and plastic and I don't want photo realism. Just a basic properly lit scene that lets you enjoy the beauty of V4."

If you want something 'S.uper S.exy' you'll inevitably have to bother with those looks in reality, because that's where we all get our references, and that's what we'll involuntary compare your images with.

So none of the skin looks wet or as if she's applied lotion? Skin looks like plastic? Damn, how come I don't see that.

Quote - Google for references. There is quite a variety of wet looking skin:

• dry skin with rolling off droplets (needs a good dry skin with a layer of drops, pretty hard to achieve)

The shader does have droplets on it. If you can't see them that is bad. Maybe I can make them bigger but she is rendered at a distance. Hmm.

Quote - - skin covered with a thin water film (that makes it reflective, not so much specular) - skin covered with lotion (what makes it more specular and reflective)

• mixtures of any degree of the previous

fine detail like sss and fresnel effect can add a good deal under certain light conditions (artificial light, studio lights, indoor renders) but can as well be omited in outdoor or sunshine renders. it always depends on the current condition.

Damn, so you don't see her as wet at all? This is nuts.

Quote - Skin isn't simple, and you have to master lighting as well as shading to a certain realistic degree. From there you can tweak your settings further to your liking.

just my 2c.

Thanks.

Quote -

...My final analysis of this morph is that it's so conventional in terms of your standard implant mannikin that there is little to even catch my attention. You conjured this up, so apparently you must like it.

The purpose for this character is to get the skin right.  This is in no way a character I'd ever use.

Quote - As vilters stated, that's the important thing. In terms of being appealing in some prurient sense, I suppose it/she will work fine in a generic manner which seems to be the goal?

Just want to get the skin right.

Quote - Something to remember about pornography is that it is completely disposable... Once you have an orgasm it's totally useless and nauseatingly boring. Unless some type of mental pathology is involved what's the point. Just more base human animal baggage.

Hmm by mental what do you mean? Remember the whole point of this is to simply know if the skin looks right and delivers a simple, sexy look. hehe I can't write a mentally stimulating story just to show off the skin to to confirm new methodology for my workflow.  I don't think I stated my goal well enough.

Quote - Hope I haven't offended or discouraged... You're trying to learn and discuss, the whole point of this forum.

Of course not man, you already helped me out a lot :)

Quote - Oh, BTW... she looks more lively with the expression. I'd lose the boob frame hand pose in favor of the classic hand bra pose or maybe a top. I think a semi transparent top and bottom with some pubes visible would be more sexy.

I put ten seconds into her expression. I'm not even worried about that. That pose is the same thing. I put like 1 minute into it.  But rememeer the figure, pose, gesture, none of that matters. I'm just trying to get the skin right.

I probably should of just put her into a T pose with no expression.

Quote - Sir, with all respect.
You can render whatever you want, the MOST imporant thing is : YOU like it?

I really like the skin but I can't trust my own eyes.

Quote - But, with those big balloons, sorry that are no breasts, and those needle thin arms?
With those VOLUME legs and tiny-tiny feet?
Proportions are not right at all. => One of the reasons there are no "V"s in this house.

It's standard V4 with a few FBM's.  I'm not worried about the figure, pose, morphs, etc. Just worried about the skin.

Quote - The shoulder-armpit is completely OFF. = Second reason for not using "V"s.

Poor -poor girl that has to carry those balloons around.
For me that is a complete turn OFF.

Damn, I even made the breasts 50% smaller lol.  You said not using "V"s. What do you mean, Victoria?

Quote - And by age 50 they will hang at navel level. :-)

I like?
The belly and the legs.

Belly and legs nice ;)

How about the skin? THat is the whole point of me doing this hah? :) > Quote - > Quote - Do me a big favor, can you tell me what the first thing you notice when you look at the images above?  Don't sugar coat either and be honest, you won't hurt my feelings.

They all have too much specular, as the highlights are burned out...

Edit; the second batch are better in that regard.  If you are not using Gamma correction,  try running the changeGamma script to set your non-texture maps' gamma to 1.0 and enable rendertime gamma at 2.2 in Render Settings and you should be able to cut the light intensity which should fix that...

I'll try this right now :)

I highly recommend this thread stay on track, within the TOS and that appropriate flags are used or it will be locked. K?

Betty Boop was sexy, Blondie was sexy. Neither of them exactly had high tech skin. Sexy comes from a lot of elements, the character, the setting, the situation. The classic pin-ups usually featured an element of surprise, an embarassing moment, a cheeky pose, the expression, a few key props … IMO, you should work on those things first and worry about the physics of skin later. Do you want to be an artist or a dermatologist?

Newest batch of renders. The major difference is i lowered the specular and light strengths as you can see by the light meters. 

BODY LOTION

**
**

WET

Wet Up close

Wet Up Close more detail after someone saying they couldn't tell if she was wet.

I tried Gamma Correction but didn't like the results at all.

The only other thing I can do at this point is continue to tweak the skin based upon your guys recommendations or try going for IDL.

IDL .. OH LOOK just because her surroundings are red, V4 is completely red now too. WHAT THE HELL?! When I hide the base prop pool backyard the problem goes away. I have bbenvsphere in their set to panoramic view.

Please tell me how this render turned out skin & lighting wise. I understand she doesn't have make up on. But i'm just curious about lighting & skin.  This is with SSS & IDL.

Someone please critique these last images. I'm nearly completion of a new SSS & IDL workflow for indoor & outdoor scenes!