I've found various ways to rotate 2D node inputs (brick, tile, or texture) in a Poser shader, by supplying inputs for U and V scales or offsets on the 2D node, those inputs being modifications of U and V variable nodes.

These tricks don't work for the 3D procedural nodes, however.  Attempts to use 3D X, Y, or Z scale inputs in the same way as the U and V scale inputs doesn't rotate the result.  The result ends up being scaled, which makes sense.

But I need, if possible, to rotate a 3D procedural shader.  Is there a way to do this?  Sadly, while I'm pretty good with 3D math relating to geometry, I'm completely lost with 3D math and surfaces, shaders, materials, or lighting.  All of that just baffles me, no matter how many threads or primers or tutorials I read. 

Is there a way to do this, in Poser's Materials Room? 

Hope this helps

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?thread_id=2863537

Quote - Hope this helps

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?thread_id=2863537

That does help, with the 2D nodes.  That was the thread from which I learned the various 2D tricks I've been trying to port to the 3D procedural nodes.  Unfortunately the methods at the link don't seem to be transferrable to those 3D nodes.  :sad:

Most, but not all, of the 3D nodes that have an x, y, and a z node can be manipulated to do what you want, I think.

Some of the 3D nodes just have a master scale, and there is nothing to be done with those.

Among those with xyz scales, they behave in a peculiar way. Each is a value and (optionally) a plugged-in node.

If there is no plugged in node, then the implied plugged in node is the corresponding xyz model coordinates in PNU. The coordinate is divided by the scale. (I have trouble thinking of scale as being anything but ambiguous. I prefer to think of these as the "period" of the features I see in the pattern.)

But if you plug in a node, then it will use the value you plugged in DIVIDED by the number typed into the parameter. (This is the opposite of all other node parameters, which use the plugged-in node value MULTIPLIED with the parameter value.)

So - if you like, you can plug in anything you want into these values.

A constant (such as Math:Add(0, 0)) will freeze that value.

You can plug in U or V coordinates, or can plug in weighted sums of the P node, which gives world coordinates.

We do not have a node that gives model coordinates - the values used internally if you plug nothing into the node.

So - if you're OK with using world coordinates or UV coordinates, you can indeed rotate the patterns.

For X, I used the P node and adjusted the first one to add X + Y.

For Y and Z, I used the P node adjusted to use X - Y.

You can make any linear combination of x, y, and z world coordinates with the P node.

Other weirder stuff is possible.

Notice the second group of props floating at a 45 degree angle. The pattern, since it is in world coordinates, has not rotated with the props. It would take model coordinates to do that and we don't have access to model coordinates in the P node. (Why I don't know - it would have been utterly trivial.)

I'm seeing... frustrating results, trying to implement what you've shown, using a Cellular node rather than a Fractal Sum.  The result is similar to what I encountered when I tried using U and V inputs rather than P.  The 3D node collapses to a point, rather than rotating.

Cellular is the one that isn't built the same as the others. 

Quote - Most, but not all, of the 3D nodes that have an x, y, and a z node can be manipulated to do what you want

Cellular cannot do it.

Cellular works by treating the modulated input as literally a modulated scale. It does not replace its own coordinates with what you plug in. It scales its own coordinates with what you plug in.

Rotation cannot be accomplished by modulated scale. Only modulated coordinates (offsets) work. 

The reason we can do it with some of the nodes is because they are implemented "incorrectly" - the labelled parameters are not scale when you plug something in - they become offsets.

Aha!  I guess I need to see if I can replace the Cellular node with FBM or something, in my shader.

That's very interesting, about the ability to rotate the others being a side effect of incorrect implementation of the nodes.  Does that mean that we'll lose this capability if the Poser Team ever goes through and revises/corrects Firefly?

Thank you for the assistance.  :thumbupboth:

The Poser team generally does not alter bad node behavior because they know people have tailored the shaders to deal with whatever they do. They usually just add new nodes, or add flags or choices to existing nodes to select the new behavior. An example is the noise type, Original or Improved.

Of course, it is a problem that "Improved" is still terrible. I see obvious repetitions and obvious rectangular grids in many of the supposedly "pseudo-random" nodes.

What are supposed to be seeing, in that attached image?  Is it the patterned streaks?  Dang, I should drink coffee before coming online when I wake up.  :lol:

The node which really bugs me, with its obvious patterning, is the granite node.  The are a bunch of great shaders in an old Ajax shader pack, which I keep using in spite of the ugly streaking or striping effect visible in the shaders which us granite.  His procedural peeling paint and "slime and concrete" shaders are some of my favorites, but they all use that granite node, and, yes, the improved granite noise is clearly better that the original noise.  Yet it stil produces streaks 'n' stripes!  Argh!  :lol:

Nice batgirl.  I've always liked batgirl.  Good scene.  well the granite looks fine to me actually.

I used to dream of being her when i was little.

Love esther

Quote - Nice batgirl.  I've always liked batgirl.  Good scene.  well the granite looks fine to me actually.

I used to dream of being her when i was little.

Love esther

This may not be the best image to illustrate how the granite node fails.  Here, the streaks might sort of work with the composition, or something.  :unsure:  That node drives me a bit nutso, though.  Mainly because I keep using the Ajax shaders with the granite, and I haven't been able to work out any way to improve the shader and fix the problem.  Oh well.

Cage used to dream of being the character when he was little, too.  Drove his parents a little crazy, IIRC.  :lol:  Then Star Wars happened and he identified more with Luke Skywalker and everyone was happy.

I need to find a decent (and free) html editor, so I can upload current builds of my characters to my website at Morphography, actually.

yes, agree - batgirl and harleyquinn look great!

BB wrote clean noise shader, but I haven't got link.

Quote - Check this out.

nice for a waterfall special effect.  (affect?)