Yes - parameter modulation. I have it pretty straightforward in matmatic - one line of code, actually will make a PBR shader in Poser.

But - there's so much more than PBR. PBR doesn't do subsurface scattering. PBR doesn't do anisotropic reflections. PBR doesn't do refraction or volumes. All of these things are possible with Cycles!!!! PBR is the gaming boys catching up to US. We have had physically accurate for a long time.

Meanwhile, I think the PBR parameterization is excellent because it standardizes the PARAMETERS. The physics is assumed. So it's a really nice thing to work with. And look at all this detail packed into just a few texture maps - and it works perfectly in Poser, Daz, Blender - whatever. PBR is a great idea, but it doesn't cover everything I render. For SciFi helmets and guns, though ... awesome.

Considering your skill, knowledge and the length of time you have been contributing greatly to the Poser community, I have a serious question for you..

Poser, now owned by Smith Micro, is an "enabling" package. It is not a "content" package. It's more of a toolkit than anything else and it gives us some basic content to play around with, but it is a product that relies entirely upon content creators for its longevity. In short - It relies on private contractors for the majority of its value to the consumer.

You continually amaze us with your material magic. This is no false praise. What you and a very few, very select, very knowledgeable few have contributed to Poser users can not be understated.

With that in mind, how much of Poser's perceived "deficiencies", focusing on Firefly, are due more to the deficiencies of content creators or the host of what could be considered "sub-standard" products being offered for it? Products that do not make use of the full capabilities of Poser and Firefly?

In the heady days of personal computing, there was a continuing argument going on that pitted "full control" producers, those who demanded full control over their entire production process and product lines, versus those that wished for a more open, flexible, production model that largely left "content" and "what can you do with our product" up to the end-user and third-party producers. That war is still raging... But, one of those companies, the one that opted for more full control over their entire product line, is now considered to be one of the most powerful companies on the planet.

With open product lines, you get much more variety and users have much more capability to customize their product how they see fit. But, quality and expertise in production as well as the esoteric knowledge necessary to take full advantage of a product's capabilities can often be found to be lacking.

You may not wish to answer and that's fine, since I'm making an observation as well as asking a question of someone. But, I think it's something worth considering. All too often in my purchases, I find what I consider to be "substandard" work. I'm no expert, but I can tell when a UV map sucks or a creator didn't feel like adding anything more, material-wise, than a texture map. (Not even a bump!) Few options, or options that are meaningless, bugs that were ignored, bad topology in some models, single material zones, using textures where geometry is necessary, etc...

With all the stuff that you demonstrate for us, such as the above, it seems to me that if Poser had "sub-contractors" with half of your knowledge and skill generating products for it, or at least a tiny bit of your concern for quality and customer satisfaction, Poser's users would be much happier with their choice of product than they may otherwise be today.