Quote - > Quote - Testing the satin shader still. This time on dawn...still having difficulties with getting other colours to work as I would like.

You're experiencing the classic mistake of the non-math shader person.

For any given setup (gamma, lights, environment, pose, angle, color) you can find a shader setting that looks OK as you expect it to. (Similarly, you could just draw it and it would look OK, too) Change anything, and now you moved to a different position on the response curve of the shader, and now it doesn't look OK. You see the result as needing "tweaking".

If you are familiar with mathematical graphs, the situation is this: Given a single setup (i.e. a single X value in your graph) you keep tweaking until the shader output (Y value) seems to look OK. But the shape of your graph (how it will respond to all the other X values) is not visible to you and you have no idea that what you've got is wildly incorrect. Essentially you're looking at your entire graph through a pinhole, and adjusting until that one point lines up with your pinhole.

But as soon as you move your pinhole (setup changes, i.e. different X value) you discover that your function is not in line with that pinhole, so you move it up or down to re-align. But now go back to your first pinhole and you find you moved the entire function, not just the point you wanted to tweak, and your original OK results are now terrible.

I don't know what you're doing with your bricks so I can't help you fix it. You will faff about endlessly if you're eyeballing your pinhole.

BB, from a Poser perspective, would you give us an example of how math might stop this from happening?

My RMP Store | Freebies

Poser Ambassador; Poser 11 & 12 / DS4 / Metasequoia / Silo / Zbrush / realityPaint / UVMapperPro / XD 4 / Ps CC / Fw / Ai / Painter 12 / Clip Studio Paint / Comipo / Reality 3 / Windows 10 / Units = Poser Native