129 threads found!
Thread | Author | Replies | Views | Last Reply |
---|---|---|---|---|
igohigh | 1 | 212 | ||
igohigh | 8 | 340 | ||
igohigh | 17 | 767 | ||
igohigh | 14 | 690 | ||
igohigh | 8 | 333 | ||
igohigh | 2 | 216 | ||
igohigh | 16 | 576 | ||
|
igohigh | 77 | 3414 | |
igohigh | 3 | 753 | ||
igohigh | 15 | 638 | ||
igohigh | 10 | 282 | ||
igohigh | 4 | 167 | ||
igohigh | 4 | 119 | ||
igohigh | 4 | 148 | ||
igohigh | 13 | 336 |
2,593 comments found!
I am speaking of the first render above. I clicked the wrong one in the folder and did not realize until uploaded; most forums allow the poster to 'edit' a post but I do not see that as an option here...?If you are talking about "Recent Renders", open the panel, select the render you want to delete, and right-click to open the contextual menu. Superfly does not recognize DepthCue, you need to use the Volume settings on the atmosphere node to control that environment. Use the PostFX to control exposure post-render.
Very nice render BTW.
Thread: Poser 12 Renders | Forum: Poser 12
**Somehow I grabbed the wrong version and don't know how to delete it or replace it?? I do not see an 'Edit' option.
The final one is not so bright......
Thread: Poser 12 Renders | Forum: Poser 12
Still working on it but I thought I would show it before I dive too much into post work and it no longer be a "Poser 12 Superfly" render.
I have worked it some as I:
1) Didn't like Poser's Depth Cue blurring the foreground so much, or maybe I just don't have a handle one using it yet?
So I separated it with two renders; one Depth Cue and one not and combined them in Photoshop for the look I wanted with some depth in the background and not blurring her feet and legs.
2) The raw Poser render was too 'flat' for my taste, did not separate the foreground, mid-ground, and background for good outdoor look.
So again I rendered the foreground with 'Transparent Background' to separate the render and control the lighting (and depth cue effect) separately. Also the background mountain and sky are projected on a plane so the sky got 'Depth Cued' with the mountain and valley so I pasted it over a non-depth render and cut out the sky so the non-blurred could show through.
Other then that (and a little tweaking to the lighting) it is all Poser Superfly.....next I will grunge it to an 'old Western' look...not sure how, I never do until I do it..
Oh, La Femme's clothing is V4's outfit converted to LF. The conversion had trouble with her boots so I had a round about way to fix that (a story for another day, another post)
Two Lights: One IBL with an HDRi and one Infinity light with slight desert tint
Also an HDRi applied to the Background to blend lighting with the background image.
The rest of the figures should be recognized by most (I made the sign)
Thread: Poser 12 Renders | Forum: Poser 12
Very true, all my attempts to do without any ambient on the snow just turned it all grey. Adding the noise filter to it and a value of (I think) .03/.04 is where I settled and chose that I would just have to post work in the shadowing. Results where not too bad in some FireFly tests I ran but then I am trying to learn SuperFly so that just defeated the whole goal.The render resembles a stage production rather than an outdoor festival of sorts. A far cry from being an actual nighttime lit environment. Rendering a pure white surface is very tricky in Superfly and adding any sort of ambient illumination just overwhelms shadows in general. I like the post-work but you can still see the underlying glow of the snow on the ground.
Thread: Poser 12 Renders | Forum: Poser 12
Make the background trees bigger, move them back further and use DOF blur to separate the foreground from the background trees. Just a thought.Actually I did have another set of hills and trees behind at first. I took them out as the entire tree section just was not getting shadowed at all. I even tried a Spotlight set to Black with shadows at 1,000 and it did not help (I think that was an old trick, does not seem to work in SF). With the extra set of trees/hills it was very taxing on my system once the characters were added.
Thread: Poser 12 Renders | Forum: Poser 12
I haven't posted much around here but since we are all putting Poser 12 through the paces, here is my recent SuperFly render.
The final image is heavily post worked in Photoshop as I could not get the shadowing and depth I wanted from Poser alone so I will post the Before and After.
I could not get the outfit to fit LaFemme as the hood kept separating so I reverted to Vicky4.
Used just Background lighting with an .Exr (used 4K as the 8k blew the image out, maybe there is a way to fine tune that but I don't know yet) and used one Area Light.
As you can see in the original render I was unable to pick up any good shadows even after ditching Flink's Cycle shader on the snow, but that is what postwork is for, right?
Anyway, the basic theme is:
Each year when Santa takes to the sky with his reindeer to deliver toys to all the good little girls and boys, Mr Claus remains behind and entertains the elves until his return.
(oh, and the ones coming in from right, well those are Krampus' elves and their reindeer, Rudy)
After Postwork:
Before Postwork:
Thread: Render Dpi vs Pixle? | Forum: Poser 12
@ChromeStar
You wrote: "When you rendered your two images, did you keep the width and height the same, in pixels?"
Answer: Yes. In ALL examples I have done here the Pixel width and height were NEVER changed.
@Cyogreem
Spot on, everything you have said.
@JoEtzold
I have already, multiple times, acknowledged your pointing out "Resampling" function in the Image Editors.
The rest of your rant - perhaps if you actually USED Poser 12 you may be able to see what Cyogrem and I are seeing.
@ChromeStar
You wrote: "Poser renders pixels."
CORRECT
You wrote: "Graphics files like jpg and png store pixels. The amount of detail in an image is determined solely by those pixels."
True, but a little more complicated then that. JPG is a highly compressed image file where files such as PNG, PSD, TIF, RAW (well, we will leave that one out...) all have ability to hold much more data and are therefor higher resolution (and larger files).
....I think back years ago when some creators where posting their textures in BMP format; HUGE files. Back then I had a tiny Windows 98 computer, I once mentioned that I was converting them to JPG due to storage size and some where AGHAST that I would do such a thing for they said the JPGs would give me much lower resolution and therefor poorer renders....this is TRUE, but back then I was only rendering for 'pretty pictures on the Internet' not for printing.
You wrote: "If the number of pixels is correct, you can trivially change the DPI setting with no loss of detail -- by changing the print size while keeping the pixel dimensions the same"
True! However as JoEtzold pointed out - be sure to Uncheck the "Resampling" box in the Image Editor (checked by default in all of mine) or it will change the Pixel width and height. By unchecking the "Resampling" (as JoEtzold pointed out) you can tell the printer which Dpi to print out said Pixel Dimension.
@caisson
Yes, that pretty much clears it all up.
True, it is a minor bug - once you know about it AND if 'print' quality is not the final output target, otherwise most Poser users will never know the difference or that it even exists.
@ Everyone:
I think this issue is warped up for now. A 'minor bug' has been found, it only effects a small number of Poser users but it is not a function or use killer by any means.
End Result (ONLY for those who print for quality) - Determine your Print Size in "Pixel Dimensions" then in the Image Editor be sure to UnCheck "Resample" (like JoEtzold pointed out) so it will Not change your "Pixel Dimensions" and then enter your Dpi into the Document settings - hit Print
(well, only hit "print" once you have set all your other particular 'Printing Preferences' and 'color management' settings and your desired 'printer profile' from your libraries...THEN hit print - but NONE of these are Poser setting issues)
Thread: Render Dpi vs Pixle? | Forum: Poser 12
THANK YOU Cyogreem!!! THANK YOU!It comes to it that you will not be able to just change the dpi in Photoshop expecting to keep the same size increasing the dpi as the dpi is produced while rendering and can't be faked expecting to achieve a better quality in a Image application, so this would not make a better quality of your Image. true dpi are generated when rendering, the higher the dpi the smaller your render square will be.
Thread: Render Dpi vs Pixle? | Forum: Poser 12
Well at least you seem to see what I am getting at here.Seems that poser 12 is clearly broken compared to all the previous versions when it comes to DPI. all previous versions work well and clearly render at the DPI setting not reducing it . You will note this when reducing an image rendered at 300-600 dpi in Poser 11 and reducing it for Web at 72 Dpi that it will loose quiet allot of quality and not be as sharp. Actually it is not the Idea having such an Option in Poser 12 expecting it to work and having to calculate a Increased size to achieve the effective DPI you want to end up with.
Seems Poser 12 will remain for some more years in Pre Release not even the Poser 11.1 SM to Bondware's 11.3 version has ever been finished before the support stopped it just has been dropped with a broken Python engine that needs to be run with a 3rd party fix ! Not a very serious marketing strategy.
If you tell it how many pixels you want you'll have to sort the print size and resolution yourself."
I told Poser both; What Print Size I want and the number of Pixels" - I had this all worked out ahead of time at the Print End.
- As you can see in the Poser 11 example above (using the 300px/in) P11 did what I requested - there was no need to "sort the print and resolution myself" as P11 gave me two different px/in renders as I aksed it to.
However, Poser 12 ALWAYS changes the px/in (pixels per inch) to 72 no matter what I tell the Render Engine to do.
You said:
"In the example screens you've posted, the image has the same resolution in both 11 & 12 - 640 x 480 pixels."
TRUE, I did so for the whole sake of comparing what the two versions of Poser are doing to the Resolution.
BUT, look again - in both Poser 11 & 12 I made TWO EACH RENDERS; one at 72px/in and one at 300px/in
You said:
"That number of pixels can be printed at either 8.888 x 6.666 inches at 72 dpi, or 2.133 x 1.6 inches at 300 dpi."
Here is where you go off the target - the Target its to Print BOTH 72dpi and 300dpi at 8.88 x 6.666 inches - - my example above should be Two Renders from Each version of Poser. Each version of Poser should have rendered Both 72px/in AND 300px/in ALL at the same 0000 x 0000 size. Only Poser 11 seems to have done this for Poser 12 did Two renders at 72px/in
The 72px/in will be less quality then the 300px/in
So the question is:
Given a Render size of 640 x 480 and render it Twice each using a Different Resolution value (one 72px/in and one 300px/in)
That should give out Two different final renders of Two different Resolutions, right?
A) 640 x 480 at a low resolution of 72px/in
B) 640 x 480 at high resolution of 300px/in
According to my sample: Poser 11 does this but Poser 12 does not.
According to my sample: Poser 12 is rendering both at 72px/in as confirmed by Photoshop
According to my sample: Only Poser 11 is rendering two different resolutions of the same pixel dimension (640 x 480)
**** In Short ****
If I had a 10 inch x 10 inch section of my Monitor with say 3,000 x 3,000 pixels and I view it with 72 pixels per inch then I have 5,184 pixels of color information (resolution), but if I view it with 300 pixels per inch then I have 90,000 pixels of color information and therefore a much higher, clearer, less grainy image. - - DO NOT CHANGE THE 10 in x 10 in
Thread: Render Dpi vs Pixle? | Forum: Poser 12
@JoEtzold ; First let me thank you for pointing out that you are NOT using Poser 12 to support your argument that what we see in Poser 12 is not happening. That makes a whole lot of sense.
Now, I really did think I was going to need to spend this much time for I thought I had given enough information and samples BUT here it goes:
The scene is the SAME, very simple. Only thing I change is the RESOLUTION SIZE in Poser then without changing anything I open the render in Photoshop and take a look at the Document Size.
Now here is what Goes Into Poser 12 and what comes Out (forget about the "Resampling" for I am changing NOTHING)
***Note: Two Renders, Two different RESOLUTIONS asked for but BOTH come out as 72
Now here is Poser 11: Same scene, ONLY changing the RESOLUTION, I change Nothing when I open it in Photoshop.
***NOTE: Poser 11 gives me One 72 Resolution Image and One 300 Resolution image
As the Pixel Dimension are NOT changing, what this tells me is that Poser 12 is rendering at a MAX Resolution of 72 pixels/inch but Poser 11 is rendering the requested 300 pixels/inch ALL with the 640x480 .......or is Poser 11 lying and really only rending both at 72?
So; is ANY version of Poser actually Rendering at resolutions higher then 72 ?? Poser 11 claims that it is, but Poser 12 is saying it can't.
So I will just leave it at this final 'explanation' from the web:
Thread: Render Dpi vs Pixle? | Forum: Poser 12
adp001 posted at 3:08 PM Fri, 17 September 2021 - #4427633
Okay, PPI if you wish - just keep in mind that Printers do not print "pixels", Printers print 'dots'; ie; the value is labeled "Resolution". Therefore in the Document size the terms PPI and Dpi are interchangeable.STOP!
The software in your last post says nothing about DPI! All I see is "pixels/inch", PPI!
PPI vs DPI: What’s the Difference and Why It Matters to Photographers
I am done with this thread, as JoEtzold has said; he is not interested in this and no intention of printing out lots of different pictures automatical - if this is not something you use Poser for then why get upset because someone else might.
I don't print Comic books but I will not get "upset" if someone who does opens a conversation about doing so with Poser.
In closing; my solution has been found in JoEtzold's pointing out the "Resample" function of post editor software. All the rest of the bickering here is mute and the "trivials of DPi" would indeed be a topic for the 2D software threads.
(**bottom line: Poser not fully saving out what was fed in, one extra step in a 'print' workflow, no big deal....for me anyway)
Thread: Render Dpi vs Pixle? | Forum: Poser 12
@JoEtzold; and one more thing to point out to you - my OP, I am not working with JPG, my output from Poser is PNG
We have only brought JPG into the topic as "Document Size" comparison as cameras output JPG or RAW in higher end camera.
I work with PNG or PSD format (sometime TIFF) to keep the higher resolution that is lost when compressing into JPG.
So again: Document Size (media size & Dpi) are the print quality of any given Pixel Dimension.
I bring this up as I was looking at your referred to links - they do not seem to address the Print Resolution of a given JPG.
For Document Size & Resolution it does not matter the Format of the Image: If I have a 180dpi 4x5 Document Property set on an image, I can save it as PNG, TIFF, PSD, or JPG and it will open in any other Image Editor as THAT size and and dimension. (Except for Poser, for Poser will calculate it back down to Dpi of 72 and what ever document size that correlates to the given Pixel Dimension.....hence the "oh bother")
Thread: Render Dpi vs Pixle? | Forum: Poser 12
Rhia474: I am not sure as late I do not have much time for rendering, BUT since P12 release I have heard tidbits about the render engines so I took it that is why they say opening older scenes you have to do some tweaking of materials...don't know about going backwards as I have not explored.
Now, for your image - when you set the Dimensions and the Dpi, in your Image Editor (any one, I don't know why JoEtzold gets a different reading in PhotoImpact as I do not, ALL my editors read all files as they are saved) - now, for yours; is the Pixel Dimension (height and width) still the same values as you input in Poser?
In my last samples above: Note how #1 and #4 have the Same 'Pixel Dimension' (the top values). This is Size in digital space. The 'Document Size' and 'Dpi' will be the Resolution within the Print Space on a sheet of paper.
For my Printing I first created a Blank picture in PhotoShop, then I set my desired Resolution and Document Size and took note of the Pixel Dimension as my Image Editor calculated it - (with Resampling ON) if I change the Dpi it changes the Pixel Dimensions.
Not sure if perhaps this the "correct" way to go but to my I was Reverse Engineering so I could tell Poser what I wanted.
Now for yours, they blurry, I am guessing it may be a Render Engine issue? One Engine rendering your textures different then the other?? Not being a Poser engineer nor having the files to recreate and experiment....I am only guessing.
But check your Render in the Image Editor, see if the Pixel Dimension is as you input into Poser.
@JoEtzold; I don't know why your Image Editors do what they do. All mine (both paid and free) will always open any image up in what ever it was saved in even when I take it into a different editor - I often take my Photos as well as Renders into multiple editors to take advantage of what each has to offer.
Example: I generally begin with a photo in PhotoShop, from there I also have access to Topaz Labs filters, then I may save it and open it in On1 and do further editing, then perhaps into Affinity Photo, then back into PhotoShop - at ALL Times if it is a 180dpi photo it remains 180dpi when I reopen it. If it is a 300dpi it remains 300dpi
In ALL my Image Editing I NEVER reduce to 72dpi until the LAST step and only if I am posting to the Web. If I intend to Print it REMAINS at (generally) 200-300dpi whichever I DECIDE to do with it.
Now, there are few exceptions such as On1, that one likes to Upscale and often to an image property that I have to reduce or flatten to further work with in PhotoShop.
But still I have NO Image Program that will alter my Document Settings (page size nor Resolution) when going from one to the other.
Here are four Photos, all JPGs, all taken from Different devices, the top left being a still shot snapped from my Cannon video recorder, others from my camera, my wife's camera, and my Cannon camera.
Each device takes photos (JPG) with their manufactured Size and Resolution determined by the makers.
ALL of these four photos I ONLY OPENED in Photoshop - NO change was made to any of them - I just opened the photo and pulled up the Size via the Edit tab at the top, made NO CHANGES to ANY VALUES.
Note how each photo reports the JPG's file size.....NONE where changed from what the Camera device saved the file in.
The "File Properties" is what a printing device is going to read for output. Like the old saying "Garbage In, Garbage Out", one needs to tell the device How to print it, therein is the Document Size portion of the file's Property tag.
If I tell any editor to Save this file in xxxx and next time I open it, it reads cccc - that is a problem.
And once again - I can open All these images in All my editors and All will read the Same "Properties" for each photo/image/render/gif/png/Tiff....and so forth and so on.
Now, any Changing of these values will effect the Quality of the print. As none of these are set for printing to 8x6 or 9x10 or 11x8.5 or even some large Poster Size, the Pixels will be changed: squished (removed) or stretched (spread out and added). That technically is where the "Resample" comes in, the editor will attempt to give you a smooth pixel shift by "sampling" neighbor pixels to re-draw the resized image.
This is why in the issue of my OP I was attempting to make Poser render me the image EXACTLY the size and dimension and resolution I wanted so there would be No Resizing before sending to the final print process and therefor print out the render in all of Poser's glorious quality.
However, your pointing out the Resample function, for my case, as been the solution. The question still remains why Poser wants to Change my "Document" size that Input in Properties and makes me have to go into an Image Editor and Change it back to what I programed Poser to do Before I send to the Printer.
Thread: Render Dpi vs Pixle? | Forum: Poser 12
Sorry to all that I brought this up.
As stated I have worked in the Print Industry for three decades and seen copier/printers go from mere B&W devices to full on Print Shops.
Only reason this is even an issue would be for someone who uses Poser for Print and this little quirk will only effect one's Print Workflow.
Example: High End printers such as I maintained, supported, and then eventually became the trainer for are very sophisticated today.
Lets say I work for a company that prints a magazine (catalog, whatever). Printers today you could have one department that writes the Text for each page into a database, the art department creates the images that will go onto these pages within the text.
Lets say I have been tasked to Render 20 images at 3x2.5 that will then be Batch Printed into a TEMPLATE that the other department has set up and uploaded to the printer.
Mind you, some of these printers you might find in an office, other in a print shop. One such printer at Xerox we called "the School Buss" because end to end it was litteraly the length of a school buss.
Now I have spent the time to set up and render my 20 images telling Poser what "size" (Including Document Size) they are to be. In this sample case I have no need for postwork, I will be sending them in what is called Batch Print to be merged to the Template the other depart has set up already on the printer.
I finish, send the images, hit the Print button for (lets say) 1,000 sets. I go to break, lunch, whatever and come back to grab the finished production.....and OOPS! One of two outcomes:
A) Nothing is done, the printer has an Error "Image(s) do not fit" and it is waiting for a response!
B) "OMG! WHAT HAPPENED"- only partial images are in the defined areas of the pages.
Now let me point out another saying in the printing industry: "Printer Ink per ounce cost more then Caviar" (in business not to mention paper and time)
Now of course in a Proper work environment: I should have Proofed the job before hitting Print and walking away.
This is an extreme example and IF "A" or "B" happened, it would be on ME. However, the fault is still Poser's....DARN YOU POSER, now I need to add an Extra Step to my work flow, that means Extra Time.
But again, for most in this forum this is crazy and meaningless. Why is this guy complaining? How does this effect me? I only print for Web or hobby, I always postwork and then save out (at which time YOU assign the file's properties), "This whole thread is a waste of my time, get over it".
True, if everyone was you.
Yes this is a minor quirk of Poser to not Output what was Input, but hey, I am the Master so do as I say! If I input XYZ then I do not want ZYX out.
Besides, I am igohigh, the guy who many are "afraid to say my screen name" (because they think it means something differnt then skydiving) and the one who always finds 'trouble' to bring up (hey, I spent my life as Paid to "find trouble" and find how to fix or work around it). Even my employers who 'pay me to find trouble and fix it' complained that "You always find trouble"....uh ya, that is what a Technician does:
-Find problem
-Define problem
-Devise or Seek solution (if beyond my ability)
-Test solution
-Implement solution
-Verify final fix
Now, that all said; I wonder why is Rhia474 getting what they are getting?
Thread: Render Dpi vs Pixle? | Forum: Poser 12
This does Not explain Rhia474's quality issue.
But this explains the Resolution Quality when 'Rendering for Print' (as opposed to Web)
There are Three different properties that will effect the PRINT Quality:
Pixel Dimension - the Area of the Image (Width & Height)
Document Size - the Size of the paper (print media)
**the Resolution - Dpi, Dots/pixels per inch (how many Dots/pixels to put on paper in each inch...limited by the Print Device)
As JoEtzold pointed out, if you do NOT let the image editor Resample the "Pixel Dimension" then you can change the Resolution by manually changing the "Document Size" or the "Resolution". This has No Effect on the Rendered "Pixel Dimension"
Therefore the Pixel Dimension becomes anchored.
These are snap shots of the Render I have that started this all:
**Inputted to Poser12 was 3300x2550 Pixel Dimension, 300 Dpi, which also in Poser showed Document size of 11x8.5
#1: As it opened in PhotoShop (Document Size changed but Pixel Dimension is proper)
#2: What happens if you change Resolution (Dpi,pixels per inch) it Changes the Pixel Dimension - THIS NO GOOD, BAD QUALITY PRINT
#3: Just Notice on This one how Unchecking "Resample" now Disables the Pixel Dimensions section.
#4: Now I can change either the Document Size or the Resolution values and manipulate to the Printer 'How many Dots/Pixels to print per inch' - This is GOOD. (I think)
I now have the Same Dimension of Pixels that Poser rendered, I just tell the Print Device how to view it.
Again, comparing #1 and #2:
I want 300dpi in a 3300x2550 Dimension of Pixels, NOT 13749x10624 Dimension.
And I want it on a sheet of paper 11x8.5 not 45.8x35.4
So basically I think Poser is kinda getting it right, only issue is that the saved File has to have it's Document Print Properties corrected (BEFORE sending to Print) for the target you were telling Poser....
This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.
Thread: Poser 12 Renders | Forum: Poser 12