Hello,

I am MrPhoenyxx and I've been messing with Poser for a little over 2 years now. However, I am still very much a newbie. I've read a couple of beginner's guides and some of the tutorials from here. I have not, as of yet, waded through the Newbie Thread in this very forum, but that is currently on my to-do list.

For a long time now I have been trying to produce more realistic renders. To that end, I have tried Reality 3 with Lux Render and I've talked to some people about Octane. But looking at the EZMat thread and a lot of BagginsBill's posts, as well as talking to other artists, I am starting to believe that the answer is not a better rendering engine. Rather, I need to really learn the Materials Room.

I am using Poser Pro 2014 with the latest patches on a Windows 7 machine. What would some of suggest as a starting point to learn Poser's Material Room?

Thank you in advance for any advice you are willing to share!

RuntimeDNA has a Nodes group at their forum where Bagginsbill occassionally posts some examples and solutions.  

http://www.castleposer.co.uk/

Is dated but contains invaluble information about each material room node along with examples.

The manual has extensive, comprehensive information about nodes also.  I suggest reading that section.

And welcome aboard.

As a starting point? I'd suggest you read the manual. Then experiment to see what each node will do and what happens if you combine them.

A very sound decision. Regardless of application and render engine, having a good grasp on materials/shaders and lighting (you really can't separate the two) is very important to get the results you want.

I can't point you to any other resources or learning materials, I just wanted to give you a bit of encouragement for your decision. Also, keep in mind if you're planning on using unbiased renderers like Lux or Octane in the future, you will need to learn the lighting and materials specific to those products. I find lighting and materials in both Reality3/Lux and Octane to be much easier than Poser, but others find Poser much easier, so it is a bit of not only learning the mats/lighting, but also finding what works well for you.

Just wanted to say Welcome.

It's all in the materials.

I mean to say - you can trouble yourself to learn how to use the lights, but really if you can't make a no-lights render like this, then you have a problem with materials first and only.

Once you get good materials, then you can see about getting clever with lights.

This is probably a stupid question, but which manual are you referring to?

Start here with this thread.

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?thread_id=2852694&page=4

When you see this shader, start reading real hard.

I'm sure you get this a lot Bagginsbill, but I'm honored you would respond to my thread. Thank you!

Now, can you make a new plugin where I just copy your brain?  :P

Ok, but seriously, are you saying you did not use any light at all in that example picture? Not one single light of any kind?!!

I guess the Poser Reference Manual, accessible via the Help menu (it's a PDF in the Poser program folder)

As said, lighting, materials and rendering are one, and changing renderer requires a redo of lighting and meterials. As far as Poser / Firefly is concerned, you can find something in

http://www.book.artbeeweb.nl/?book=poser-rendering

on lighting and rendering. Concering materials, Reality and Octane, I'll send you a site-mail.

Quote - I'm sure you get this a lot Bagginsbill, but I'm honored you would respond to my thread. Thank you!

Cool!

Quote - Now, can you make a new plugin where I just copy your brain?  :P

Working on it.

Quote - Ok, but seriously, are you saying you did not use any light at all in that example picture? Not one single light of any kind?!!

Yes - the lighting comes from my environment sphere, upon which I have loaded an HDR image of the Doge's palace courtyard, and then I turned on IDL.

You can get that HDRI and others here:

http://gl.ict.usc.edu/Data/HighResProbes/

You can get my EnvSphere from my site (see free stuff link in my sig).

hborre, Eclark81894, and artbee:

Ok, I thought you might have meant the "built-in" Poser manual which I actually have not read yet . But that's because I have another manual I've been using. I will make a point of reading that manual as well though. Thanks!

Bagginsbill:

I use your environment sphere already, and I've been to your site. :)

On lighting and different renderers:

I do get that you have to relearn materials and lighting for whichever renderer that you are using. In general I have found that I understand Reality 3's lighting and materials interface better. It seems more intuitive to me. 

However, I have had nothing but problems trying to do scenes in Reality 3. I have purchased quite a few props, characters, clothing, and sets over the years. Very few of them work properly "right out of the box" in Reality.

This is not surprising to me, but what it does mean from a workflow perspective is that I would be better off loading just the texture files within Poser - with no additional shaders. Then I should do all of my lighting and materials work from within Reality 3. At least, this is how it seems to me from my experience with that software so far.

That seems like doubling my work to me, since I am at the stage that I would need to learn more about lighting and materials anyway. It really comes down to, "Which application do I learn them for?" Either way I feel I need to know more about Poser materials, at least to understand better what Reality is bringing over and why.

Well if I have to learn more about Poser Materials, then why not just learn that and forget Reality altogether? Especially if I could learn to produce a render like the one Bagginsbill posted above? That's just as good as any Reality render I've ever seen.

That is the decision that I recently made, and what motivated me to finally post here. I feel it would be more advantageous to me to learn Poser materials first and foremost.

Then maybe, one day, I'll try something like Lux or Octane again.

I think it's a decent plan to just use Poser materials until you hit the limits (there are limits) and then see about Lux or other renderers.

If your renders fall short in Poser against other Poser renders (like mine) then it would be good to learn the basics first, and Poser can teach that.

Sure there are tons of goofy nodes in Poser but I don't use them, so why should you?

I use like 8 of them most of the time. (not counting math nodes - need all of those for procedural patterns - but you don't need those for image-based shaders or solid colors or one-node procedurals like Clouds)

You should know Diffuse and Blinn like the back of your hand. Once you understand those, move on to Fresnel_Blend and Reflect. Then maybe a little detour back into diffuse effects like Clay and then on to Scatter, finally Refract. That's the first 7 lighting nodes you should know.

A few visits to Color_Math, Math, and Blender will help with building combinations, but are not strictly necessary for a vast number of shaders.

The really weird stuff is when you try to make procedural patterns, like wood grain, or hexagonal tiles. But that's not basics.

Quote - More fun with the motorcycle.

I would respond, but I need to pick my jaw up off the floor first. Just hold on a moment, would you? Ugh, it rolled under the couch again...

That is just an amazing render! I mean, beyond words amazing!!

Could you clarify something for me though please? It's the enviro sphere that's emitting the light, but I thought if you attached an image, even an HDRI one, to a sphere then it was just a picture? Don't you have to add an HDRI light with the same image attached?

Nope you don't. The key thing about IDL is that it does two important effects, pretty much at the same time.

1. When deciding how much light is arriving at any given point, it takes into account how much light is leaving other surfaces (near or far) that are visible from that point.

2. In taking into account how much light is leaving other surfaces, it recursively applies a calculation about how much is arriving at those other places and bouncing off.

People imagine that IDL is about bounced light (effect #2) but it's also about effect #1 - how much light is leaving any given surface. Bounced light is light that didn't start there, but there is light that starts there, i.e. a surface can give off light from nowhere. It is the source of the light - i.e. it is glowing.

My EnvSphere glows - it is self lit - it is the source of all the light in the scene. The amount that it glows, at every point, is defined by the HDRI you attach to it.

So - the EnvSphere is set up to not bounce any light at all - while simultaneously emitting exactly how much light is recorded in the HDRI. The result is that it reproduces the lighting of the world around our scene, while not actually participating in it. If you were to load a black image onto it, you would see it as black and no amount of Poser lights (point, spot, or whatever) would influence how much light leaves its surface.

When you build a shader, you are deciding two things:

1. How much light originates from that surface (self-lit, glowing)

2. What % of light bounces from that surface.

I have the EnvSphere set up to emit the image, and bounce nothing.

Ordinary objects are set up to emit nothing, and bounce a fraction of the light that arrives. These ordinary objects are still adding bounced light to the equation, but they are not adding light. They only contribute light that arrived from elsewhere.

I think I actualy understood that...

The left one is obviously glowing.

The middle one does what is called "diffuse" reflection. Light arrives from a specific place and bounces in every direction.

The right one does what is called "specular" reflection. Light arrives from a specific place and bounces to a specific place.

Most objects demonstrate a mixture of diffuse and specular reflection (like the floor under the three pawns). Glowing objects can do those two and emit light from nothing (not reflected from elsewhere) as well.

May I ask how you made the first pawn glow? I am guessing that you did not just turn up the Ambient?

Well that's very interesting. You certainly received a lot more glow and a brighter effect than when I try that. But I'm sure that all relates to the lighting, as I am currently using a more "classic" Poser way of lighitng my scenes. Which means there are lots of lights, which I assume would drown out the ambient quite a bit.

Are you rendering with gamma correction (GC) enabled?

Yep!

I hate to jump in, but I have simple question. Don't you need some sort of specific light source (like the sun or a spot light) to get correct shadows? Even if the source is a light emitter (or several)? Does just the environment sphere create shadows even though the light comes from everywhere? Does the HDRi create shadows from the light parts of the image?

Mike

Quote - I hate to jump in, but I have simple question. Don't you need some sort of specific light source (like the sun or a spot light) to get correct shadows? Even if the source is a light emitter (or several)? Does just the environment sphere create shadows even though the light comes from everywhere? Does the HDRi create shadows from the light parts of the image?

Mike

There was an interesting discussion about this recently. Your question uses the word "need" as if there is no other way. Adding an infinite or a spot light may be a way to get sharp shadows. But if the HDRI is an >>accurate<< recording of the entire scene, including the sun at its proper relative intensity, then you can get sharp shadows anyway. You asked "even though the light comes from everywhere" - but that's just it - if the sun is properly recorded, the sun light doesn't come from "everywhere" - it comes from one tiny spot in the sky - an intense bright tiny spot. That is what makes a sharp shadow - having the majority of the light come from one tiny spot.

Doing that hot spot with a virtual sun or spot "light" is easy. Getting it properly recorded in a photo is not. Some people making HDRI know how to do it. Most don't.

This is the thread:

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?message_id=4131264

It (the thread) is titled "IBL: I don't get it" and it started out being about IBL but morphed into a general discussion of IDL and HDRI.

On page 2 of that thread you'll find I posted this image, which was made without any Poser lights - just the EnvSphere as only source of light.

Really good question Mike!!

And thanks for the response Bagginsbill! :D

So most of the stuff I've read to this point, including many artists' suggested render settings, do set the gamma correction on at 2.2 in the render settings. Should I not do this, and if so, then why?

You should be using GC at 2.2. I asked only because you claimed that your pictures aren't as bright as mine. It's the first reason things look too dark - not using GC.

So we move on. I should probably just give you a scene so there is no question about what you're using. Then you can slowly work up to figuring out what you're doing differently than me.

In my File Cabinet ...

https://sites.google.com/site/bagginsbill/file-cabinet

You'll find my mat pawn prop as a zip. Get it.

You'll also see the BBLightMeter prop in a zip. Get that too.

and

I will do that tomorrow.

I shrank my EnvSphere down to Scale 1.2% and then I modified the shader to "burn" a hole in it, so we can see both inside and outside. It took nine nodes to make this effect, including the outside glowing darker than the inside. For those of you that are a bit more advanced, can you figure out how to do this?

The pawn is the test prop correct?

Should I grab the gamma meter as well, or just the light meter?

OK, makes sense that a proper HDRI has a hot spot or spots that gives an appropriate shadow. It has to be slightly harder to get that light to point in the direction you may want then when using a spot or Infinite light. IE suppose you want the light from the front upper right to create a shadow on the floor at some angle. I guess you have to rotate the HDRI in the sphere to get the light coming in the way you want. That could be a little confusing and difficult to see in the preview. Is there a technique for this?

Can you control the sharpness of the shadow with a HDRI or is that not an issue?

I guess the way you rotated he hole answers the question about the modifing the direction of the light hot spots.

Quote - I guess the way you rotated he hole answers the question about the modifing the direction of the light hot spots.

Yes you rotate the sphere, not the image. The sphere is an actual prop with the actual image on it. You can look right at it.

Since many HDRI are not very H and need help from a light, I usually make a spot light, parent it to the sphere, then switch it to infinite. Then I line up the infinite with the apparent position of the sun on the sphere. (Tricky - you have to set up a camera with the right sight-line through the world origin. Then you line up the infinite light indicator with the picture of the sun.) Once this is done, you can then Y-rotate the sphere and the infinite light will rotate with it.

Quote - The pawn is the test prop correct?

Should I grab the gamma meter as well, or just the light meter?

MatPawn.zip is the CurvyTestProp, yes.

You don't need the gamma meter.

Make sure you also have the doge2.hdr HDRI -- get it here:

http://gl.ict.usc.edu/Data/HighResProbes/

Open the scene, locate your copy of doge2.hdr and resave the scene.

The scene has envsphere, ground, and a round wall. I put the wall there to make renders faster (rendering the doge.hdr slows it down.)

It should look like this.

It's too dark now. The "exposure" is wrong now that the sun is gone.

Click on the sky to select the EnvSphere.

The material is ultra simple - just the image plugged into the root node in two places.

The Diffuse_Value is off (don't bounce any light).

The Ambient_Value is 1. (emit the image light x1).

Change that to 4.

All downloaded. I won't have time to try a render until tomorrow though.

"Turned out OK", and I'm looking for my jaw on the floor again. :P

I do see what you meant about the artifact on the right though.

I did six renders. They all worked as expected.

Pic 1 - Doge set, pawn, and light meter. Ambient on the Enviro sphere at 1, sun on.

Pic 2 - Doge set, pawn, and light meter. Ambient on the Enviro sphere at 1, sun off.

Pic 3- Doge set, pawn, and light meter. Ambient on the Enviro sphere at 4, sun off.

Pic 4 - Doge set, random stuff, and light meter. Ambient on the Enviro sphere at 1, sun on.

Pic 5 - Doge set, random stuff, and light meter. Ambient on the Enviro sphere at 1, sun off.

Pic 6 - Doge set, random stuff, and light meter. Ambient on the Enviro sphere at 4, sun off.

I also included a screen cap of the render settings that I usually use. You can download all of the pics at the following URL:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8xzc3m65dw9rayk/bagginstest.zip

I looked at your render settings and noticed you reduced the IDL bounces to 1. Watch out with that - you'll be missing a ton of bounced light, given that there is a white wall and floor to interreflect with each other. Compare renders with 1 bounce, 2, 4, 6, and 8.

I would post pics but Rendo uploader just died. (again)

I was wondering about that myself. A friend suggested those settings. In general, compared to what I was using, I would say it slightly improved the look of my renders.

I don't have Poser at work or I'd send you the settings I used to use up until about 2 weeks ago. Nothing surprising or revolionary, I just didn't use the D3D plug-in before and set some pretty standard settings in the regular render settings window.

Something else I noticed, these scenes rendered very quickly compared to some of the stuff I'm working on right now. Is that possibly related to the number of lights in the scene, or just to the number of objects?

By the way Bagginsbill, I was wondering where a person would get the latest copies of your shader sets? I saw your car paint on your free site, but that isn't the latest version correct?

Quote - Something else I noticed, these scenes rendered very quickly compared to some of the stuff I'm working on right now. Is that possibly related to the number of lights in the scene, or just to the number of objects?

Lights will consume memory.  The more lights scattered throughout the scene, the longer the render.

Quote - By the way Bagginsbill, I was wondering where a person would get the latest copies of your shader sets? I saw your car paint on your free site, but that isn't the latest version correct?

BB could answer this himself, but the better car paint shaders are associated with Dreamlight's auto series found here in Rendo.  But they are not free.  The freebie at his site is the most current available.  For free, that is.