Wow, this is better than the usual paper and cup of coffee..

I see I'm not alone. Zanzo, you see from examples exactly the issue. Another thing is, and I think it's been said, you are too far into the realism realm with this to say you are not. You have to deal with the math to some degree or resketch your FBM to go away from it a bit more.

1 These are the kind of Poser females (depiction of women) I hate.

2 Not again.

3 Considering how fast you extracted the tech, you have improved none the less.

4 You need to learn more about women and care less about men's fantasies about them (most men have no imagination). Give them a nest or a safe place. A front story...

You're passing the baby oil and showing them the jacuzzi you're gonna boink them in...

5 Why would you accept any terms of time limits when rendering or depicting the most fabulous thing on the planet?

6 Screw your client. Stay here and improve and output something beyond the norm.

Can we see the whole setup? Is there any enclosure over and behind camera? HDr must have a large shaded area...

I have not got up to .4 yet.. nor can I get a forced arm glow now that I want it. I think some random light setups are avoiding the problem, too.

Backdrop... I reread it. Nevermind

Yep. Forgot to kill the blue.

Could I just lower diffuse to 0.15 and just up my IDL Intensity a little?

I'll try it but I think old code is ghosting us. I thought IDL might bridge that light gap and it certainly is improving,,

Faye Dunaway in the Thomas Crown affair...  Waited a long time for that turkey.

Not sure where I'm going from here...;)

Notice "Indirect fill" seeming to behave. This is all envsphere. The sky is shot. That's why we were messing with 2 spheres... one to cook the light, the other to produce correct reflection. But I do not know how to emit without being visible in RayTrace and hence,,, cooking the reflections.

I break this scene up into a few separate catagories;

Indirect light (the envsphere, SSS, reflection{not shown} and other bounced light sources).

Direct (sun)light . Also Artificial Light (not shown).

And then, the emitter which in Poser is used mosty to amp up and correct the light emitting effect of the object to its effect on the receiving surface. There is a void here, imo. Once the ambient of a wall, for example starts to emit correct indirect light, it is too bright to use in the scene. I think this is similar in reflection. I mean, the corrected indirect light cooks the reflection as well. So,,, Poser has no radiosity, alas

1st pic: Env @ 1.00 value RT @ 200% .. "indirect light" just seems too dark. The sky seems right. Outside needs some nodework but is ok.

That's camera flash on two of them. The soft specular is probably easier to control the old way. With a smoothish low setting bumpmap. More predictable results. Soft setting on EZ is the main control. Raising it breaks up specular. Lowering it eventually arrives at a hard mirror like edge. The scale of the texture and bump might let you down. They have very smooth skin. The middle pic might be possible. Hard to say... all I see is a lot of work in Zbrush to even get close.. because the mesh is the culprit for this kind of quality.

I don't know why I could not get this to work yesterday but today I opened Poser, put IDL intensity at .2, added one of my favorite Saint Fox light sets which I tweeked, and rendered. I am using a HDR on BB's EnvSphere, but I have it conservatively set at 2.5 intensity.

Congrads. I think this is my favorite by you in light quality*.*

And carodan, I'm with you. I think it's getting confusing because it's evolving. Plus we have different light tests going on. Outdoor with envsphere, indoor with emitters. Indirect light from an outdoor source with emitters,,, etc. *

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=2392902

I'm kinda blown away by that. Not sure yet what the settings did for it but I add them here to show it was no big deal,, samplewise. I wanted to do this in a nice planned way but got distracting results like link...;) I'm done polluting the thread now so, thanks and let's see what happens.

ust to clarify the lighting, there are 2 lights in this scene. a spot light just outside the windows, and a point light in the floor lamp. The rest of the light is emitted from the cieling, both bounces are set at 2.

Did you notice any artifacting issues? I was wondering if raising emitters and lowering IDL intensity is really increasing Ray success. I mean, it's missing the target less and not leaving blanks/splotchies.

Cannot wait to post my next render... sheeez

The spheres I was using was for exterior shots but I tried to bounce it into the room with 6 or 7 bounces. It's just easier to do it with a spot We still need a way to emit light and still be able to be selected invisible to some other selective surface. This was what carodan was after, I think. Reflections in the eyes are a perfect example when using hot emitters.

Doing all of this does raise the render time a tad, but the results are more than worth the wait.

I'd have to agree. Why no reflect on anything? Hust to speed up the test?