Attached Link: http://bobvan.deviantart.com/#/d5s5xsv

Attached Link: http://bobvan.deviantart.com/#/d5s5xsg

Attached Link: http://bobvan.deviantart.com/#/d5s5xs2

Attached Link: http://bobvan.deviantart.com/#/d5s5xrh

Attached Link: http://bobvan.deviantart.com/#/d5s5xr1

Attached Link: http://bobvan.deviantart.com/#/d5s5xqi

One of my fave new characters/morphs.  Finally got gen x for 4.5 so no more bouncing between the two versions to do morph conversions.  Simple flat background on a plane with a bit of gaussian added to simulate DoF.

Had to hop back on to Daz to play with Callad's new toys.  This has the floor and wall prop with the Curve&spot light. Also one Reality mesh near the floor poniting up. 

Quote - Still playing with DS/Hex :)

Did you create her with Hex :lol:

Nice John!

Songbird - Fleetwood Mac (Christine McVie)

For you, there'll be no more crying,
For you, the sun will be shining,
And I feel that when I'm with you,
It's alright, I know it's right

To you, I'll give the world
To you, I'll never be cold
'Cause I feel that when I'm with you,
It's alright, I know it's right.

And the songbirds are singing,
Like they know the score,
And I love you, I love you, I love you,
Like never before.

And I wish you all the love in the world,
But most of all, I wish it from myself.

And the songbirds keep singing,
Like they know the score,
And I love you, I love you, I love you,
Like never before, like never before.

Quote - Songbird - Fleetwood Mac (Christine McVie)

For you, there'll be no more crying,
For you, the sun will be shining,
And I feel that when I'm with you,
It's alright, I know it's right

To you, I'll give the world
To you, I'll never be cold
'Cause I feel that when I'm with you,
It's alright, I know it's right.

And the songbirds are singing,
Like they know the score,
And I love you, I love you, I love you,
Like never before.

And I wish you all the love in the world,
But most of all, I wish it from myself.

And the songbirds keep singing,
Like they know the score,
And I love you, I love you, I love you,
Like never before, like never before.

Doc this is very nice!

doing a bit more texture work in blacksmith.  this is another one that came out fairly decent

Nice stuff sharkey! Question what is the best settings for a second skin outfit? I find Matte is good for alot of clothing but I imagine it would not work soe great for second skin clothing since you also would alter the skin? Some glossy balance then?

Quote - Some nice stuff here lately, wish I had something to share.  Maybe I'll dust off Daz this weekend just so I feel like I'm doing something. 

I've spent the past two weeks very, very slowly learning my way around Cinema 4D and Vray (and Maxwell render, and Mental Ray, and Indigo...I have a million different trial versions installed right now).  Tried out Carrara first and it was nice, but I figured if I'm learning something new why not just go all out and work with one of the big boys.  Only complaint is that I can't find any Lux plugins.  

If I had access again to Vray or CD4 I would never touch Luxrender again, LOL. I have used Vray and Maxwell in the past and loved, loved, loved them. CD4 has always been on my wish list, but unless I go back to school or win the lottery, just can't justify the price.

Quote - Nice stuff sharkey! Question what is the best settings for a second skin outfit? I find Matte is good for alot of clothing but I imagine it would not work soe great for second skin clothing since you also would alter the skin? Some glossy balance then?

Adjust the SPEC Map in Gimp or Photoshop. Take the SPEC(ular) map that came with the skin, load it in PS, load also the MAT of the skin with second skin, select only the 'cloth' from the second skin; copy to layer, make the selected 'cloth' pitch-black. Drag the new layer onto the SPEC map, merge, save as copy. Then use this new SPEC map for torso, nipple, hip ect.

Works like a dream.. :)

Screenshots if you have the chance please! As i imagine this can be useful for others as well many thanks!

Quote - Screenshots if you have the chance please! As i imagine this can be useful for others as well many thanks!

While I can only think of a couple of reasons to ever use a second skin (they are designed for game models mostly) think the lighter the color, the brighter the specular. Spec maps are also designed mostly for game models. With an unbiased renderer, you really shouldn't use spec maps since your specular comes from the lighting on your surface, use your bump or normal map to define the sufface and how light will react with it. In game models, they are usually manifold, which means all one model so if you have an outfit with buttons on it, you would use the spec map to tell the game engine that the buttons are a different specular than the rest of the shirt, whereas with render models, you have specific parts that you can define as different textures and shaders.

Very very nice renders from everyone, I'm now inspired to do something.  Not sure what, but something!

Sharkey, are you texturing a dress in Blacksmith?  I'm a little confused about the reference to a second skin.  If it is a dress, your texture is great.

No Second skin is some outfits that come stuck to a body. if you render it in 3Delight its not a biggie but with lux it will match the glosiness fo your skin settings making it look to wet in some cases. I find Matte really working well for alot of clothing. I may just try different levels of glosiness.

@ FMSC and Bobvan

I really disagree on the "you really shouldn't use spec maps ". With a specmap I can simulate how skin or cloth or hair should be interpreted by light.

Example: Dublin comes with secondskin hair. If I do not use a proper specmap her hair will be as glossy as her skin giving very unnatural reflecting surfaces.

With a specmap I can 'steer' which part of one material should be seen as 'Matte' and which part should be 'Glossy'.

Just my two cents..

Bob, haven't got the time to make a tut atm, maybe somwhere this week. :)

I never said I disagreed I dont know any better LOL! Which is why I am asking for advice..No rush I dont need it this minute

Quote - Spec maps are also designed mostly for game models. With an unbiased renderer, you really shouldn't use spec maps since your specular comes from the lighting on your surface, use your bump or normal map to define the sufface and how light will react with it. 

I initially shared this point of view while writing Reality 1.0. Fortunately I decided to look a little more into this issue, and I then added support for specular maps in Reality 1.0, improved in Reality 2.0 and vastly expanded in Reality 3.

This is because specular maps actually help us specify physical properties of real materials. They are not just for games. Skin has several levels of glossiness, depending on the location of the body. For example elbows are less shiny than the face. Even on the face there are different spots that are shinier than others. There is no way Lux, or any other renderer, can calculate accurate effects of shine without a specular map. In fact I generaly reject texture packages that don't come with a specular map. It's a sign of lack of attention to details, IMHO.

Please note that a specular map is a completely different thing than a reflection map. Reflection maps have no business in physically-based rendering and they are often employed by game engines. Many Poser texture packages come with reflection maps and Reality ignores those map.

On the other has a specular map is a very helpful tool to improve the realism of materials.

In Reality 3 there is also an option to use a map to drive the glossiness strength through a map .

Hope this helps.

With your skill I dont doubt it Mikey! It would be scary to see what you could do with Vray and cinema 4d

Actually I don't think VRay, and certainly not Maxwell, have much distance on Lux. I can't compare speed of rendering but result-wise Lux hold its own very well in comparison with those very expensive packages.

Quote - Actually I don't think VRay, and certainly not Maxwell, have much distance on Lux. I can't compare speed of rendering but result-wise Lux hold its own very well in comparison with those very expensive packages.

One way to resolve that is give us our update so we can move onto Lux 2.1 LOL

Nice try :)

Quote - Nice try :)

LOL your holding me back im still using s weekly build from the summer so I can have the refine brush...

You can use 1.2, just make sure that you don't have displacement maps. You can have as many versions of Lux installed on your machine as you want. Install 1.2 in its own directory and switch to it whenever you want. If you need to render something with displacement use 1.1.

The Output tab of Reality is where you select which version of Lux to use. 

Cheers.

Quote - You can use 1.2, just make sure that you don't have displacement maps. You can have as many versions of Lux installed on your machine as you want. Install 1.2 in its own directory and switch to it whenever you want. If you need to render something with displacement use 1.1.

The Output tab of Reality is where you select which version of Lux to use. 

Cheers.

So you are saying all I need to do is go through all the maps in my reality and remove all displacement maps? Is there anything that would depend on them?

You just need to blank the disp map field in the Reality editor, nothign depends on those and they can be restored with one click. You also need to set the subdivision at zero.

Quote - You just need to blank the disp map field in the Reality editor, nothign depends on those and they can be restored with one click. You also need to set the subdivision at zero.

 

 

Ok I know I can hit re load studio map if need... I will play with it thanks!

I have another question then since items like the water prop depend on sub D would i need to use 1.1 to render anything with the water prop?

Yes, that is a very good question. Lux 1.1 will be needed for that or the ripples/waves will look reversed.

Ok so if anything needs to be sub D'd or looks odd revert to 1.1 until the update got it!

Quote - Actually I don't think VRay, and certainly not Maxwell, have much distance on Lux. I can't compare speed of rendering but result-wise Lux hold its own very well in comparison with those very expensive packages.

I'm about to throw together a little test right now.  I'm going to set up a scene in Daz then export it to C4D.  Render it with Lux and Vray.  My average Lux render is probably abou 10 hours, closer to 3 for simple scenes and as high as 40 for really complex ones (on an overclocked i5 2500K quad core).  My average Vray scene has been around 2 minutes, the longest I've had so far was 20 minutes.  I'll post results so you all can judge the quality vs time spent.

But I need to add  that no matter what, I wouldn't be getting any decent results with Vray if I hadn't spent the past year playing with Reality and Lux. It gave me a great foundation for lighting and settings like spec, displacement, bump, etc in a very simple manner (and with a great instructor) that has made Vray way less intimidating 

Quote - Nice stuff sharkey! Question what is the best settings for a second skin outfit? I find Matte is good for alot of clothing but I imagine it would not work soe great for second skin clothing since you also would alter the skin? Some glossy balance then?

I'm not sure there bob.. I avoid second skins like the plague.  My intent is to always go the opposite direction.. i want some looseness and baggy spots and maybe a few wrinkles.  IMHO.. form fitting clothes are only for swimsuits and fat ladies at WalMart

Quote - > Quote - Nice stuff sharkey! Question what is the best settings for a second skin outfit? I find Matte is good for alot of clothing but I imagine it would not work soe great for second skin clothing since you also would alter the skin? Some glossy balance then?

 

I'm not sure there bob.. I avoid second skins like the plague.  My intent is to always go the opposite direction.. i want some looseness and baggy spots and maybe a few wrinkles.  IMHO.. form fitting clothes are only for swimsuits and fat ladies at WalMart

LOL @ Floormart I only have a few

Xandi.. kind of unsure on your question.  What I've been doing for relaxation lately is creating textures for some of my fave clothes.  Some have come off quite well.. others have been horrid and never saw daylight past a couple hours in the oven.

As far as the whole displacement conversation goes, I've been schooling myself for the last few months on the topic of normal maps.  With the use of nrm maps and inverted nrm maps you can gain a lot of mileage for adding depth to a lot of things.  In fact, if you go through my gallery here, EVERY texture I have made for someone else's product has used NRM maps instead of bump.  By adjusting intensity and by tweaking the 3 details you can achieve some pretty nice texture.  Dsp maps are another thing that I avoid on all but the rare texture here and there.  I've done rock, wood grain, fabric sand, dirt and grass with a lot more realism using nrm maps alone rather than adding a dsp map.

As far as spec maps go.. I love them.  I love to be able to fine tune the amount of shine/gloss in things.  I'm still learning how to manipulate them as well as I've seen some ppl do; but, I feel like I'm coming along quite well.

Here's my completely un-scientific and uncontrolled experiment.  Same object with very similar lighting setup (3 mesh lights in Reality, 3 Vray area lights).

Top is the Lux render at 4 hours.

Bottom is Vray render in 4 minutes and 39 seconds. 

Well its much faster I guess once you figure out what you are doing...

Well, there is no doubt in my mind that the Lux version looks a lot more realistic and with more vibrant in colors. 

Thank you for the test.

Lets also not forget that the Software suite you are using to produce your Vray image comes in at several thousand dollars, where as the Lux Image will only cost you what...???. $59.95'ish at current 'Reality' pricing.

I'm also surprised that the Lux Image took 4 hours to render.  That is a very simple scene.

But thanks for the comparison..

Cheers,

S.K.

 Its not really fair to judge which render engine is better at this point since he knows Reality well but is using Vray for a few days... Still you cannot argue the cost of Reality/ Lux vs those other programs. The only thing with using lux is will sometimes take longer...

I am a little insecure about posting my latest upload here cuz it's a 'full view nude'..

Awf cuz I tried to make it a tasteful nude, but for me I pushed the 'boundries' of what to show and what not.

When I realised a woman has no bodyparts she should be ashamed of, I pushed the button 'submit'.

1920 X 1080 in full view.

Here is the link to the Deviant page where you can see 'Justine -from the Top-'

http://callad31735.deviantart.com/art/Justine-from-the-Top-349934807

Please let me know what you think of it. Tasteful nude, functional nude or.. Too much..?

Two regular meshlight.

Charley left feedback on D/A sweet render

Paolo I just read your post about the update on the DS forum outstanding!!

Quote - Paolo I just read your post about the update on the DS forum outstanding!!

Huh? Update? What update??

Link plz, pretty please? :)

Quote - > Quote - Paolo I just read your post about the update on the DS forum outstanding!!

Huh? Update? What update??

Link plz, pretty please? :)

For us to be able to move to lux 2.1 http://www.daz3d.com/forums/viewthread/289/P465/#226687

As Paolo can attest to I have been a pain in the @ss about this update so needless to say BRAVO!

Ah! That IS good news!

Thankee for the link Bob! hug

Quote - Ah! That IS good news!

Thankee for the link Bob! hug

Backatcha baby!!