Well, I'm assuming that you are rendering sequential stills frame by frame instead of rendering directly through a codec. If not, then some of the noise could be coming from the compression. Likewise the image format for the stills should be as lossless as possible before combining into an animation. I use PNG format but TIFF would work too. In Poser 5 you can also increase the accuracy of frame-to-frame pixel interpretation by lowering the minimum shading rate (to at least 0.5) and increasing the pixel samples to 4 or 5. Don't be too quick to blame Poser's mathematics - it has a higher degree of mathematical precision than any other 3D program I've seen. The problem is with non-CL modules which were originally developed for other applications which had LESS precision than Poser.

Right - this kind of problem is not limited to Poser. These days with more software developers depending on 3rd party modules and plug-ins, the problem is compounding. It is no longer financially viable for a developer to underwrite the cost of creating their own render engines, shaders, cloth, hair etc. and still keep up with the competition. So we have issues of compatibility between components that need to be addressed by each application. In fact I was just talking with Roman Ormandy (CEO of Caligari - Truespace) at a showing of the new Truespace 7 software, and they are having similar issues that they are addressing. It is really hard to find every different issue until the application is fully integrated and in the marketplace with thousands of people doing different things with it. Anyway, some of you might be interested to know that Truespace 7 will have a material system very similar to Poser 5, and it looks like swapping materials will be relatively easy.

I can't really disclose any confidential information I may have about Poser, but I CAN tell you that addressing technical issues and improving workflow are numbers 1 and 2 on their priority list ;-) Sorry it took me so long to find this thread, but I just can't get around here as often as I'd like. Most of the really knowledgable P5 folks are hanging out at RDNA, so if you want faster and possibly more accurate responses to your P5 questions, come on over to the P5 forum there.

This is the EnviroS project that I am working on. To give you an Idea of its size, in the middle of the lake there is a small island. On that island is a temple. Inside that temple is Victoria - WITH a SWORD, of course! Currently the Enviros world is about 16 miles in diameter (8 miles radius form the center of the Poser Universe) - this mountaintop crater is more than 2.5 miles across.

Hi folks - I've documented all of this, so here is what is REALLY happening and how to work with it. Because of the need to have limits for raytracing, Poser 5 has a preset camera view limit of 1000 Poser Units (8,000 feet). Anything farther away from the camera than that will not show. There is a way to get it to show, by SCALING the camera, but nothing in Poser is that simple ;-) Poser uses different types of cameras. Some orbit around the world origin, some orbit around a selected figure, some orbit around a selected body part and some don't orbit at all because they are isometric views. When you SCALE a camera you are actually scaling its VIEW of the 3D world space - you are not making the camera itself larger or smaller. The CENTER of any such scaling will be the point about which the camera orbits or, in the case of the isometric cameras which have no orbit center, a different standard altogether. In all cases, however, the visible limit is 1000 Poser Native Units from the camera lens (not from the world center or from the orbit center). That is why the numbers above don't seem to correlate because there are compound factors such as camera position and object center confusing the issue. To put it simply, if you want a camera to see FARTHER than 1000 PUs, then you must scale the camera UP. For all of the perspective cameras, the formula is very simple: VibleRange=1000x(100/Camera%Scale). This means if you want to see twice as far (2000 PUs) you must scale the camera by 200%. Scaling the camera to 500% will enable it to see up to 5000 PUs from the camera. But be aware that when working with a camera at any scale other than 100% all camera position DISTANCES (not angles) must be scaled too and INVERSLY to the camera scale. So, to scale a camer up by 200%, but keep it in the same spot, you need to DIVIDE the xTrans, yTrans and zTrans by 2. The nice thing about this is that when using the parameter dials to move the camera, it moves much faster and requires less dial turning to get it where you want it. The ISOMETRIC cameras (Top, Front etc) are different, and require much larger scale factors to get large objects into view. I've used scales as high as 900,000% to work on objects several miles across. Oh, and by the way, although I agree that this is one of the largest Poser props yet, I don't believe it holds the title of THE largest, because the Tycho Space Station project from PoserWorks (formerly IW43D) is more than 2 miles across in actual Poser Scale, and some of my own projects (see next post) are even larger than that.

operaguy: I didn't see your original thread before posting here, but you are correct about other problems which may be resolved by this fix. In fact in my original thread on the subject I did mention that possibility. It is just that the only things I have actually tested and verified are the raytracing aspects. So I should have said above that this technique has not been VERIFIED for anything other than raytracing. It appears that you have discovered another possible use, and if your results are predictable and can be duplicated by others, it would be verified too. I have found that there are also MAJOR improvements in cloth behavior when the world is scaled up. I can finally make cloth that is not either stiff as heavy canvas or flimsy and fluttering like tissue paper. When the world is scaled up, you can get the cloth to drape and sway just like cotton or silk or just about anything. At least that is the way it appears, but I haven't done all the controlled testing necessary to verify it. randym77: Yes CL is well aware of this and I'm working with them on a solution. The problem is complex, however, because there are so many different aspects to Poser. It is made even more difficult by the fact that Poser contains 3rd party modules that have their own unique requirements to interface properly with the other modules. So, it is difficult to apply a fix across the board which does not turn out to introduce problems in unexpected areas. So CL IS working on it, and is doing their best to see that other problems are avoided, but that involves a lot of testing. I'm confident, however that they will resolve the issue in the best possible way - whatever that turns out to be.

Yep - it all scales together - cameras, lights and objects. In fact unless you intentionally leave one object in your scene unparented as a reference point, when you scale up the box, you will see no noticible change in the preview window. But don't be fooled by the fact that it looks like nothing has changed, because the NUMBERS have been changed even though the relative aspects of the scene appear to be the same. BUT there is one little caveat: When you first parent the camera to the box, it will shift position. You must correct that BEFORE you scale the scene up, so after parenting the camera to the box, re-position it, and then scale the scene up - everything stays in its relative place.

P.S. It is easier than it sounds - you don't have to parent EVERYTHING - just the few things that are parented to the UNIVERSE. All the things that are conformed to or parented to one of those objects will follow their parent, so they do not need to be re-parented to the box. It would be great if a script could be written that would do that for us. Especially if it allowed us to choose the scale factor. Many scenes do well at 500% but I've found that some require scaling as high as 1000% (10x) to be effective. The only things that do NOT scale with this technique are P5 procedural textures (fBm, brick, cloud, weave, tile etc.) - they will have to be scaled manually, but even without re-scaling sometimes you get decent results, so its best to do a trial render before taking the time to adjust them. As for render times, there WILL be differences. Some things will render faster, and some things will render slower - averaging out to be about the same as the unscaled scene. One thing that will really slow things down is close-ups of high resolution textures.

Actually, this is how the mechanics of the process works: Remember that this solution was created to address problems with Raytracing in Firefly, and to the best of my knowledge it is not required if raytracing is off. There is a very good reason why I've recommended the technique of parenting everything in the scene to a prop box rather than just scaling each object. The prop box (and simple ball) have their origins set to the World Origin in Poser. If you scale them up you will notice that they scale from the "floor" up, and keep their place on the ground. Other props (such as the high res ball) and most Poser objects have their origins located at their own center of mass. This means that they will scale from that point outwards, rather than from the common world center. The result is that when you have multiple objects in the scene, scaled on their own origins, they no longer have the same spatial relationship to other objects (they are not in the same place relative to each other). So, it is important to think of this technique as scaling up your 3D WORLD and not just scaling up your objects - and the only way to scale the world is to make everything scale from a common point. That is where the box comes in. By parenting everything to the box, INCLUDING spotlights AND camera, and then scaling the box, you are effectively scaling everything around the world origin. When the PARENT of an object is scaled, all of the child objects scale about the same point as the parent and not about their own centers. So this is about the easiest technique I've found that will produce the desired result in most situations. Of course, you want to turn OFF the visibility of the box so that it does not render.

ziggie - the rooms look very promising to me - I'd love to get them too and maybe I can help you finish them up. I have a huge texture collection and quite a bit of hospital experience too, so maybe together we could come up with something to your liking. I just hope you don't abandon it altogether because the rooms would go great with your other props.

WOW - that is an amazing gift to the community - THANKS to ALL who put so much effort into it.

I think the idea is that this is a fractal world that is generated almost instantly based on parameters you select. The whole world does not really exist except where the camera can "see" it. Instead of you having to tediously create a heightmap or use a terrain editing tool to "sculpt" every aspect of the landscape, it is all done for you, and quite realistically too. Then you just fly around the planet looking for an area that is similar to what you want, plop your camera down and modify to suit yourself - or just generate a new world repeat the process. You can zoom into any area as close as you want and use just as much or as little of the world as you want. This is unlike Bryce and Vue which have very finite limits to the terrains they generate, so depending on where you place your camera, there may or may not be a suitable continuous background available. In Mojoworld, no matter where you place the camera, there is terrain and atmosphere extending in all directions. If you have ever tried to create a detailed heightmap or use a terrain sculpting tool, you will know how difficult it is to make something that looks real because it is hard to draw the level of detail required for close work. For example, compare a coastline scene in Mojoworld to one in Vue or Bryce and you will see that the Mojoworld one is much more realistic because of the very small irregularities in the waterline. In Vue and Bryce a coastline often looks more like it was gouged out by a gigantic shovel, leaving very little detail. Of course, you can edit your terrain in Vue and Bryce to achieve the same level of detail and realism, but you first need to know a bit about geology and what the parameters of a "real" terrain are and then you must be able to draw or sculpt that. To say the least, it is a very tedious and time consuming task. I would agree that Mojoworld is not for everyone because it is very different from Vue and Bryce which are more powerful in the long run, but also much more difficult to master. I see Mojoworld as being suitable for those who want to quickly generate a realistic (or alien) landscape with all the desired features (mountains, rivers, lakes, seashore, desert etc.) without having to create each feature manually. On the other hand, some people find it very rewarding to hand-sculpt every aspect of their terrains.

Lynn - thanks for the info. Can you tell us what the differences are between the Standard and Pro versions? I can't seem to find a comparison chart on the website, and reading advertising-lingo in the descriptions doesn't really make that clear. Also, is there any possibility that a Poser sidegrade offer will be made on the Pro version?

Looks good - pretty much like a P5 shader I developed over a year ago - I'd be extremely interested in how this is accomplished in P4 or ProPack.

A little displacement usually fixes the problem. Here is how to set it up on whatever material is having difficulty. The Displacement value usually needs to be higher than 0.001 shown here, but try this first, then increase the value by small amounts to find the point where it works best. As I recall on the tarp it worked well at about 0.05, but you can go up to 0.1 on most things without altering the shape too much.