Nails60 posted at 2:22PM Sun, 11 July 2021 - #4422954

Poser 12 still seems to have the 32 thread limit for rendering, so assuming the cpu has hyper threading (or the amd equivalent) and as someone has stated 24 cores, ie total of 48 threads, a third of the threads would not be used. I don't know much about amd cpu's but if they make a 16 core, 32 thread with higher clock speeds you might get better performance in poser cpu rendering

Ahh that's an interesting point. TBH, I can spend £500 on a computer and CPU to double my performance, or £2k to improve it by 5x with the 3090, so that's going to be my direction I go in the short term. The multithreading is just one more thing that makes me go hmmmm... Thanks for that invaluable info!

primorge posted at 2:20PM Sun, 11 July 2021 - #4422929

Afrodite-Ohki posted at 5:27PM Sat, 10 July 2021 - #4422898

Just a Clarification: Superfly is not only for photoreal. You wouldn't call Pixar movies "photoreal",

Yes thank you - point well taken, although photreal IS my objective.

That said, even with Superfly you'll need to render on CPU if you're trying to render a scene that's heavier than what your GPU can take. You'd be hard-pressed to find one like that with a 3090, but with my 3070 I've already found a scenery prop set that it can't handle.

That's very much what I was hoping.

HartyBart posted at 2:19PM Sun, 11 July 2021 - #4422889

But if you only want to render photoreal on the GPU, then a 24-core CPU may be overkill.

Thankyou - yes, I was coming to that conclusion

Afrodite-Ohki posted at 2:51PM Fri, 09 July 2021 - #4422843

The RTX 30xx series won't work with Poser11, but will with Poser12. Not sure if it can really use all that threadripper has to offer though - I use a Ryzen 9 so I can't say much about that.

And yes, full Optix and all with the 3090.

Great, thanks very much Afrodite! Yes, I have 12. Threadripper is basically 2 Rizens. It works fine with that then?

jimmy1 posted at 3:48PM Thu, 25 March 2021 - #4415605

You don't need a reflection map. This is a hangover from that cheat mentioned above: In the bad old days Poser had no reflection node, and a reflection map run through that sphere map was used to give an illusion of reflection. If you've been at this long enough you may still be able to find materials that include them:

From Maclean's Home One. This really only worked for small items; if you wanted to show a figure reflected in a mirror you had to do it in postwork on a rendered image. In version umpty-mumble the reflection node appeared, and actual genuine reflections became possible, and there was great rejoicing, and you didn't need those maps any longer. In fact they may be part of what's messing you up.

Now what this did was to blend the reflecting object's diffuse color and the reflection map, and it appears to still be at it, which is why setting the diffuse color to black may help if you're looking for a "mirror-like" reflected image.

Thank you for your reply.

Yes, I have lots of products that use simulated reflection maps Jimmy. So are you saying that the reflection input's only purpose is legacy support for old pre-reflection firefly content? So I should simply plug in a glossy node (for instance) to alt specular, then reflect an actual environment dome more or less as seachnasaigh is indicating?

seachnasaigh posted at 10:40AM Thu, 25 March 2021 - #4415583

The Cycles EnvironmentTexture node allows you to specify equirectangular, but I don't see that sky map even if I make the construct invisible.

No, it's not designed as a sky map but as a REFLECTION map. Render that image in Firefly to see how it's supposed to work.

seachnasaigh posted at 8:47AM Thu, 25 March 2021 - #4415577

The sphere map node is a vestigial leftover from the days when Firefly needed cheats.

If you want a mirror ball, and you're using P12 and rendering in Superfly, I'd use the PhysicalSurface root.

But, the PoserSurface root will do. Try killing the Diffuse and Specular (set value to zero, set color to black). See what happens. Do you have the mirror ball in an environment, such as the construct? That enclosed environment will give the camera something to see in reflection. If I remember correctly, your Lincoln memorial image map would only show where there is no environment to be reflected.

Thank you so much for your response. I have no problem using the Physicalsurface node but I was preparing for a tutorial on the PoserSurface inputs and realised that I could not get a Superfly reflection from the reflection node. If I leave exactly the same wiring, it performs as expected, using my image map plugged into the background map which shows that the background node is working to create a reflection without the need for an environment dome. To be clear, I'm not trying to create a mirror ball - I'm try to create a reflection on a normally coloured but relective surface so if I turn the diffuse to black, it would defeat the object. Regarding the sphere node, how do I tell poser that I am using a spherical projection rather than a rectangular one then?

In fact, I seem

hborre posted at 12:16PM Tue, 23 March 2021 - #4415447

Thank you. But I don't understand what the point of the features WAS.

This is what I found as written in Poser 8 Revealed: The Official Guide

Reflection Lite Mult. An option to multiply the lighting effects into the reflection map.

Reflection KD Mult. An option to tint the reflection map by the diffuse color

And here is a posted discussion from 2007 on why not to use it.

https://www.renderosity.com/rr/mod/forumpro/?thread_id=2696787

Ahh thanks for that hborre - the legendary bagginsbill. If he says it, I trust it!

hborre posted at 11:36AM Tue, 23 March 2021 - #4415445

I know Snarly's SceneFixer removed the checkmarks but it doesn't work in P12. IIRC, someone else (Structure?) wrote a small script to do exactly the same function but it may not have been updated for P12 also.

I don't MIND them; I just wanted to understand them.

Y-Phil posted at 11:23AM Tue, 23 March 2021 - #4415439

There are scripts that remove these checkmarks

Thanks Y-Phil

hborre posted at 11:17AM Tue, 23 March 2021 - #4415432

You don't need it. It is an old holdover hack that was never removed from the PoserSurface. Many old models still have that fully activated so whenever you come across it just uncheck the boxes and continue doing what you're doing. There are better ways to implement those features.

Thank you. But I don't understand what the point of the features WAS.

Afrodite-Ohki posted at 3:57PM Sun, 28 February 2021 - #4414013

My newest LaFemme girl Debora (not released yet).

I love the scene. Beautiful light on her legs.

an0malaus posted at 2:57PM Sat, 27 February 2021 - #4413940

Given the flaming wreckage that the end of Flash wrought, Poser could easily have been in the same situation with unsupportable Python2 and broken widgets. Thank you!

Is that so? I saw that Adobe had pulled the plug, and thought to myself that I was glad I was not using older apps that depended upon, but was fortunate not be affected by it personally. Simply terminating it like that did seem like a move calcualated to piss as many users off in one go as possible though. It's one thing to end support, and another to kill it dead like that.

tim posted at 2:40PM Sat, 27 February 2021 - #4413938

I understand the sentiment on the Python upgrade. But Python 2 was designated EOL (end-of-life) status by the broader Python community in 2020 (reasons here: https://www.python.org/doc/sunset-python-2/) and will slowly fall further behind with no more open-source care and feeding. It would have soon become a liability for Poser.

Hey Tim,

Ahh, this is information that I would DEFINITELY have included in your press release. I'm not HAPPY with the reason (beyond your control), and your press release definitely presented the worst POSSIBLE case for the switch, but if there is a valid technical and future-proofing reason, then it makes this bitter pill a bit easier to swallow. I live in a world where I now need to run two versions of Poser. Fair enough.

I suppose the community and customers like you will ultimately judge if this was the best approach.

Incidentally, I purchased LockMaster - it's an excellent tool but I did crash up against two issues - one of them potentially app breaking. When I installed it, and it asked for my details to run it the first time, the screen looked like this:

Those white rectangles were not added by me - they are a problem with the interface failing to respect x2 scaling on a 4K monitor - and are the data entry field windows. I have reported the program's failure to scale to one of your colleagues and was told that I should just resize the windows ( a weak response in the first place) but on fixed windows like this, it's not even an option.

I feel as though this scaling issue is something that is going to need addressing and a white paper written in order to guide coders and vendors to creating well behaved products. I'm not being snarky, but we're way beyond the point where 4K monitors are a luxury any more.

The second was that, regardless of where I installed Poser 12 (in my case on the D drive), python scripts are now installed to C:UsersPublicDocumentsPoser 12 ContentRuntimePythonxxx

What's the point of giving me a choice where to install Poser and its content files if you then spray elements all over my computer? And why did you change the former Python scripts location?

tim posted at 6:14AM Sat, 27 February 2021 - #4413930

Thanks for the Poser 12 review on your channel. I thought it was quite good & a fair critique of our efforts with Poser thus far.

One of the first script products using this system is "LockMaster" by Ken1171_Designs at: https://www.renderosity.com/rr/mod/bcs/lockmaster-for-poser-12/148152/

Thank you Tim. It's great to get feed back from someone on the inside and I'm glad that you perceive it as fair. It is my hope to reignite interest in the program over the coming year with my future tutorial videos. I see that you guys have already put together some very professional vids with Charles who seems to have a great personality and be a great communicator, and it somewhat concerns me that they are receiving so few views. I hope that this is not a reflection of the size of the remaining Poser market. I think that we have to revive interest WITHIN the community, but also find a way to spread our excitement beyond our group of enthusiasts. How to achieve that is the million dollar question.

I appreciate you clarifying that the verification system on scripts is optional. I think that we lost far more than we gained as far as Python 3 is concerned. Here's hoping that you guys can take the program from strength to strength.