Downloaded Emily mesh and textures and had a go, the mesh loaded in without problems, the exr format texture files took a while but it was straight forward to load as a 2d texture (no UV issues). How to set it up for best results I don't know, below used the physical root node and I boosted the spec to get a response to the scene lighting. For a better example of using Emily in Poser see BBs post here.

I should have put in proper eye textures but the zombie look was too appealing.

On reflection just boosting the spec value breaks the PBR model, as the upper surface of skin is a different optical properties than the lower maybe it cannot be done off just one node which means either layers or cycles node. The idea of using the physical root node is to produce a simple unbiased skin mat that is consitent across different lighting sets. The problem I found is the cross polarized image was much darker than expected (loss in the capture process ?) - typical the spec component should be around 4% but I boosted it much higher for above. Back to the drawing board but curious if any thoughts on PBR and skin mats.

ironsoul posted at 7:59AM Fri, 22 March 2019 - #4348521

On reflection just boosting the spec value breaks the PBR model, as the upper surface of skin is a different optical properties than the lower maybe it cannot be done off just one node which means either layers or cycles node.

Sorry I'm not following this thought. If something needs two nodes, you don't immediately decide it has to be layers or cycles - we've been fresnel blending in FireFly for 12 years. What mattered in producing high-quality renders was to make the math do what physics does, and HOW (with one node or 100) doesn't matter. Obviously, if we can get the right math from one node, that is preferred.

The idea of using the physical root node is to produce a simple unbiased skin mat that is consitent across different lighting sets. The problem I found is the cross polarized image was much darker than expected (loss in the capture process ?) - typical the spec component should be around 4% but I boosted it much higher for above.

I am on the wrong computer and don't have the digital Emily resources at hand. What is the average value of the image in question? Was it around 10 out of 255? That is 4%, linear. Did you forget to tell Poser to use gamma of 1 on that map? Also, 4% is for smooth glass. Human skin surface is rough, and does not have an IoR of 1.5 but closer to 1.35 so we'd expect the specular map to tell us a reflection coefficient around 2.2 %. But do we even know what the specular map coding means? Suppose instead it has been normalized to represent the fraction of the idealized smooth surface fresnel reflection? In which case it would be encoded a lot higher than 4%.

It is unfortunate that PBR does not actually say what units and semantics are in a specular map - only thing we know is bigger numbers mean more. That's not telling us much.

ironsoul, that LightColab page you linked talks about the issue you just raised ... >>>The problem I found is the cross polarized image was much darker than expected (loss in the capture process ?) <<

"Another issue to be aware of is that the proportional amounts of the diffuse and spec will be off slightly. This is because the parallel polarized image lets 100% of the spec through, but blocks 50% of the diffuse, meaning that the spec will be 2x brighter, in relation to the diffuse, than it would in a photo without any polarizing filters. You can observe in the images above that the skin looks oilier than it normally would. Once aware of this, it is easy to adjust for it in your comp by either brightening the diffuse or darkening the spec a bit. In the animated image below, you can see the effects of brightening the cross polarized "diffuse" pass and the resulting composited image."

This is an older Emily. She agreed to be scanned again, 7 years later. I like the added character in her face.

Download page: http://gl.ict.usc.edu/Research/DigitalEmily2/

Loaded the .obj into Poser.

Opened the .exr texture files one by one in Affinity and saved them out as 100% .jpg. The files are 6000x6000.

Attempted to engage both the supplied eye files and also a typical poser eye texture on “eye-inner” and “eye_outter” but unsuccessful. I don’t know how to get the eyes. So I have nothing on the eyes. Somehow the eyelashes got their map.

Firefly Render, high settings with EnvSphere, one difuseIBL and one area light. GI engaged.

This is my amateur shader (please be kind!)

Note: there is a displacement map! Should both bump and displacement be engaged? I don’t know.

Note: on the page linked above, there is a summary shader scheme, including one for displacement which engages an included file “00_displacement_micro.exr” which is 16,000x16,000 in size. Naturally, being greedy, I wonder if poser can digest that! Sure, you could reduce the micro-displacement file, but doesn’t that defeat the purpose?

Hilarious. After all the trouble to get a great specular map, I connected it to the spec node but left the value at zero! I've upped it to .75, highlight size .01 for the render below ... it's Emily resting from a workout, sweating.

@operaguy - like how the skin detail has come out but I was assuming the micro displacement map would be the choice for the bump input, did this not work? BTW thanks for your earlier post, think reducing the spec levels in my render would help.

@bagginsbill - the idea of avoiding extra nodes is to keep compatibility with Substance painter which uses texture maps only . The thought behind adding a layer was to have the lower skin layers (pigment and SSS) set-up in the base layer whilst the detail and specular on layer 1 and blend the two together - in theory these could still be PBR mats compatible with Substance painter in terms of exporting/importing the textures . The 4% is/was the default setting used by substance painter, which I didn't question. Apprechiate the explanation and figures.

I was afraid to attach that micro displacement file. It is stupendous. 16,000 x 16,000 pixels. Will poser allow raw .exr files like that to be attached in the material room?

[side thought] All this is moot if merchant resources vendors don't include the final maps, or at least the two images]

Anyone know how to solve the eye situation with this mesh?

I turned down the specular value to .2 in this one:

::::: Opera :::::

Turns out Poser WILL allow the attachment of giant .exr raw 16000x16000 displacement maps! I'm rendering now.

Meanwhile, can any shader gurus translate this into a material room shader? As seen on this page: Download page: http://gl.ict.usc.edu/Research/DigitalEmily2/

[image changed for clarity]

shader tree2.jpg

This one: I plugged in the huge micro-displacement map that downloads with the Emily2 project.

In this case, I plugged the map into both bump and displacement nodes, and set the value for each at .003

I'm sure I could fiddle all day with this research project, but the real question is how to get these resources from vendors.

::::: Opera :::::

I found that I accidentally wrote over my DigitalEmily scene from 3 years ago, but after hunting through many autosaves I found the one that made this image.

The skin shader is nothing more than the Scatter + Blinn I've used and published a thousand times. I did not use a specular map. The variations in this image are simply by inserting an HSV node between the color map and the scatter, and then adjusting it for various skin tones.

There was considerable extra junk in it to make the eyebrows but that's not how you usually deal with them.

I'm having a bit of Poser nuttiness with this file. Attempting to click on the shaders results in Poser hanging. Apparently Poser was more capable 3 years ago than now. Sorry - screen shots will have to wait. I'm going away for the weekend.

I guess BB's post adds up to "deploy the diffuse map and drive roughness, glint, wetness and height with procedural." Is that correct?

Naturally, if indeed Emily-like results in an extreme closeup can be achieved this way, hurrah! To hell with all the double photography and post-production.

Still ... you have to pull out your camera to shoot at least one set of images, right? For the diffuse? How much more work is it to produce the polarized partner shots? {I keep visualizing a purpose-built dual camera to take both shots at the same time}

I have not heard back from Adam at 3d.sk about the feasibility of adding the second shot.

::::: Opera :::::

At the risk of looking foolish (not the first time); do they not make polarizing light filters for camera lenses anymore? They used to be common and cheap for any major lens manufacturer back in the 70'-90's. Big issue as I see it is movement of the subject between shots with and without filter.

parkdalegardener,

Yes, those filters are common and not too expensive.

That's the easy part. As you point out, taking two shots as identical as possible is the problem.

I don't believe you need two cameras. You just shoot with the lens in "non-polar" mode, then twist the filter and shoot again. I still don't see how this can be solid, even with a tripod, since there will be a second or two or three between shots, and if shooting a live subject ... well, there will be movement.

The reason I keep fantasizing on a two-aperture or two camera setup is: some automation to take both images at the exact same second. Even then, the polarized shot will take longer, since less light gets through.

In practice polarising filters are used to reduce reflected light and improve the saturation of colours, especially useful with blue skies, water and glass. Definitely still made. The idea with cross-polarised photos (both camera and light source are filtered) for texturing resources would be to cut down on light reflecting from the skin. There are some photos, along with height maps derived from scan data, available at surfacemimic.com (search for 'Adam' and 'Isabella'); other sites I know of are texturing.xyz and 3dscanstore.com. Commercial licences don't come cheap though ;)

operaguy posted at 9:12AM Mon, 25 March 2019 - #4348633

I guess BB's post adds up to "deploy the diffuse map and drive roughness, glint, wetness and height with procedural." Is that correct?

No, I certainly used the bump map and it is the key to the realism. What I didn't use or bother with (and never have, on skin) is a specular or roughness map. IMO the specularity differences are minute, and the roughness differences are not mandatory nor desirable. Oily skin areas are something people avoid and use makeup to eliminate when doing portrait photography.

Here is a specular-only render, showing the super-important contribution of the bump map.

This bump map is decidedly NOTHING to do with a derivative of the diffuse color map, and it is why the results are so fantastic. Bump is like the #1 thing. Color is important but far less important, and roughness (modulation) is not important at all, as far as I can tell.

Hi BB,

1. when you say "roughness maps" (and that they don't matter much) do you mean displacement maps?
2. if I were in possession of a great diffuse map with little or no reflections, how would I make a bump map, since (and I agree) you don't make it from the diffuse map?

Thank you

::::: Opera :::::

{edit to add: I suspect the answer to #2 is: a hi-res 3D scan}

There is a plugin called Shine Off by imadio software that will help get rid of skin shine. It works with Photoshop 7 or later, Photoshop Elements 2 or later, and PaintShop Pro 7 or later. There is a trial version to test it out.

ShineOff Plugin

As far as creating bump maps there are several videos on youtube for how to generate skin details in ZBrush (Mudbox or other sculpting methods would be similar). To get the detail that Emily has you need high resolution skin displacement maps (the best are from texturing XYZ but they are pricey if you want to use them commercially).

At texturing.xyz, $140 for the full suite, and that's just the face. You have to purchase small parts of the body one by one. It might take $1000 for a full figure.

As for "how to generate skin details in ZBrush" that would be sculpting/painting skin like an artist, right? Not from life photos.

operaguy posted at 12:02PM Mon, 25 March 2019 - #4348784

At texturing.xyz, $140 for the full suite, and that's just the face. You have to purchase small parts of the body one by one. It might take $1000 for a full figure.

As for "how to generate skin details in ZBrush" that would be sculpting/painting skin like an artist, right? Not from life photos.

Correct.

If you don't mind watching tutorials that are sped up, here's a guy doing George Clooney in ZBRush:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnVROI8SF9Y

Here's another one that shows using several layers of scuplting to get the detail in the face

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWCektCpaXQ

There are lots more, that is just a couple I picked at random

SurfaceMimic.com sells very inexpensive high-resolution skin patches. $20 to $30 would get all you need (4 to 6 patches) to make skin bump maps. They are royalty free.

Here's a youtube video of an artist using them to make pores on an Einstein figure in ZBrush.

As for larger-scale wrinkles, I think you paint them in ZBrush or similar apps.

operaguy posted at 11:20AM Mon, 25 March 2019 - #4348772

Hi BB,

1. when you say "roughness maps" (and that they don't matter much) do you mean displacement maps?
2. if I were in possession of a great diffuse map with little or no reflections, how would I make a bump map, since (and I agree) you don't make it from the diffuse map?

1. A roughness map would affect the roughness value. Makes the shader more or less shiny. Has nothing to do with bump or displacement, but in fact simulates nano-bumps.

2. A single diffuse map does not have the nessesary Information. You would have to make the structures yourself. Not easy.

operaguy posted at 11:25AM Mon, 25 March 2019 - #4348784

At texturing.xyz, $140 for the full suite, and that's just the face. You have to purchase small parts of the body one by one. It might take $1000 for a full figure.

Quality is expensive. Images from this site are used by the professionals, so expect pro Prices.

As for "how to generate skin details in ZBrush" that would be sculpting/painting skin like an artist, right? Not from life photos.

You can use the patches BB mentioned as alpha maps in ZBrush. You can use photos for texturing, but not for pores. If it's just pores and not wrinkles you probably can use them in Surbstance Painter too

bantha please spare the admonishment {lecture} ... i was not complaining in any way, just stating the fact for perspective. Thank You.

bantha:

Me to BB: when you say "roughness maps" (and that they don't matter much) do you mean displacement maps?

bantha: A roughness map would affect the roughness value. Makes the shader more or less shiny. Has nothing to do with bump or displacement, but in fact simulates nano-bumps.

That did not answer my question. There is no "roughness" node on the Poser Surface.

Can you please translate "roughness" into something an intermediate user of the material room such as myself can grasp?

Roughness = affects how sharp/tight or blurred/diffused the highlights are. Water is not rough, so would be indicated by very dark values in the map and the highlights would be sharp and appear bright. Dry wood would be rough so have values near white and the highlights would be so blurred and diffused across the surface that it appears dull. Note that this does not have anything to do with the amount of light reflected though, that remains the same.

operaguy posted at 2:38PM Mon, 25 March 2019 - #4348804

bantha:

Me to BB: when you say "roughness maps" (and that they don't matter much) do you mean displacement maps?

bantha: A roughness map would affect the roughness value. Makes the shader more or less shiny. Has nothing to do with bump or displacement, but in fact simulates nano-bumps.

That did not answer my question. There is no "roughness" node on the Poser Surface.

Can you please translate "roughness" into something an intermediate user of the material room such as myself can grasp?

There is a roughness connection on the Physical Surface Node.

There are two different ways to handle shine and highlights on surfaces when setting up physically correct shaders. The PoserSurface node uses something similar to the "Specular-Glossiness" workflow. The Physical Surface node, on the other hand, uses a "Metallic and Roughness" workflow, and IS more or less geared toward using textures that were specifically designed for PBR render engines, such as those created in Substance Painter.

Second post on this page starts to explain the differences:

https://forum.allegorithmic.com/index.php?topic=3243.0

Thanks caisson, bb, deecey, and bantha

However ...

I am out of my league here. I don't know what a "Physical Surface Node" is, so while the advanced people here are supplying deep information about roughness, but I'll just sit back and bookmark and perhaps review when I get more experienced.

Here's my reality: I am getting fine results with the "Lana" maps from DAZ, the diffuse and bump. Apparently, DAZ made the Lana bump map with some variant of the discussion here.

My renders are in this thread high above.

When I want to tweak, I just adjust the bump amount on the PoserSurrface, and the specular setting on it the attached map. Also the SSS and the intensity and kind for the lights. Thank you Snarly.

I am hoping to find out how to make bump maps of high quality, or purchase them, some of which has been spelled out here so far. Thanks for the links to purchasable maps.

::::: Opera :::::

operaguy posted at 3:20PM Mon, 25 March 2019 - #4348808

Thanks caisson, bb, deecey, and bantha

However ...

I am out of my league here. I don't know what a "Physical Surface Node" is, so while the advanced people here are supplying deep information about roughness, but I'll just sit back and bookmark and perhaps review when I get more experienced.

Here's my reality: I am getting fine results with the "Lana" maps from DAZ, the diffuse and bump. Apparently, DAZ made the Lana bump map with some variant of the discussion here.

My renders are in this thread high above.

When I want to tweak, I just adjust the bump amount on the PoserSurrface, and the specular setting on it the attached map. Also the SSS and the intensity and kind for the lights. Thank you Snarly.

I am hoping to find out how to make bump maps of high quality, or purchase them, some of which has been spelled out here so far. Thanks for the links to purchasable maps.

::::: Opera :::::

Explore the Power of the Poser Physical Root Node (webinar)

thanks

add:

Oh. It's for SuperFly. That's not for me. But thanks anyway.

Roughness has many names, because reasons. And they're not just SuperFly. Here are a bunch of nodes that implement roughness followed by what that node calls it.

PoserSurface Highlight_Size

Reflect Softness

Anisotropic u_Highlight_Size and v_Highlight_Size

Phong Size

Glossy Roughness

Blinn Eccentricity

Specular Roughness

ks_microfacet roughness

Clay Roughness

SamTherapy posted at 10:58AM Mon, 22 April 2019 - #4348182

ironsoul posted at 7:38PM Sat, 16 March 2019 - #4348162

No doubt you've had enough of the notifications by now but hope the following helps with your last question.

Problem with adding a mask direct to Ezskin mat is the complexity of the node set-up so layer is probably a good place to start however it has its own problems. Thought I'd do a quick example of layers with Firefly but didn't seem to work so this is for Superfly.
Create Mask

Apply Ezskin to figure

Add new Layer to skin mat, add new material and apply mask

Render...

This will create a lne where the mat ends with other textures which I think is due to the SSS. Solution appears to be to add the layer to these adjacent textures.

Render again

The layer just replaces the mats below so if you require effects like bump to propagate through its a bit of a problem. I use a much simplier texture set than Ezskin so just copy the bump onto the new layer but for Ezskin that is more complex.

Hope that helps with the ideas

I was wondering if adding the mask layers prior to using EZSkin would work. Set up a regular texture, get the masks in place, then run EZSkin. Haven't tried it so I don't know if it would be a valid workaround.

EZSkin 3 had an experimental feature to enable overlaying of one material over another.

@Snarlygribbly - Did you take down EZSkin 3 / your site? The link in your footer isn't working anymore.

@andolaurina they are available here: Snarlygribbly's scripts

"Turns out Poser WILL allow the attachment of giant .exr raw ... displacement maps!"

Thanks @operaguy !!

I'd found some nice terrain textures in CGT's sale, but Poser's documentation of import formats is a bit sparse, especially beyond the obvious...

Now I gotta figure how to get a lovely sandy wadi / valley's Terrain_Data out of its Unity package and into Poser...