I am hoping to get a kinda technical answer in language a non-technical person like me can understand. Why do Poser renders look the way they do and Max renders look the way they do?

I am jealous of that lucid quality Max renders seem to have. Poser renders seem flatter and more "translucent" than "clear and deep" if that makes any sense. Is there a way in post-work to make Poser renders look more like something done in Max?

For that matter, is it possible to simulate different render qualities such as Ambient Occlusion using post-work? I have been compositing a straight P6 render with a touch of an IBL/AO render and going over the edges of things in the scene with a blur tool set to darken.

If ya want that Uber realism Max can provide you may want to try Carrara 5 Pro as it has a fantastic renderer and is amazingly adept at importing Poser scenes, props, figures etc. 

 

I've been using it for a while now and I love it!

 

Gerard

The GR00VY GH0ULIE!

You are pure, you are snow
We are the useless sluts that they mould
Rock n roll is our epiphany
Culture, alienation, boredom and despair

do you have any examples of the kind of renders you'd like to do?

Cg Society Portfolio

In regards to momodot's post, I too have a similar question.  Here's my Eve 4 Marie figure.  I rendered her in Pro-Pack, but even with anti-aliasing checked, it still looks like someone traced around the edges of the figure with a black crayon.  Poser 6 is not an option, my machine is an old Pentium 3, and P6 is too sluggish.What can I do to make it look a little less yukki.  I have PS CE.

  STOP PALESTINIAN CHILD ABUSE!!!! ISLAMIC HATRED OF JEWS

David, you should try Renderupgrade by Shademaster, available in Freestuff.

Failing that, you could try faking Global lighting by placing lots of infinite lights in a dome over your scene.  Keep them all at low intensity and ensure only one casts a shadow.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

Quote - I am hoping to get a kinda technical answer in language a non-technical person like me can understand. Why do Poser renders look the way they do and Max renders look the way they do?

To a large degree, what many people perceive as a difference in look is not differences in render engines but rather differences in default settings (esp lights and materials). The goal of a good render engine is not to impose a certain look on an image but rather to truthfully apply the settings that the user chose for surfaces and lights. With only a few exceptions, commercial render engine use pretty much the same principles for the surface and direct lighting calculations. "That Poser look" has barely anything to do with the render engine (after all, FireFly is a completely different engine than the Poser 4 renderer) but rather the default settings for lights and materials that most people don't bother to change. In a similar fashion, people often associate scenes bright uniform ambient light with Bryce simply because Bryce has this as a default - but that doesn't mean that other programs wouldn't be able to use similar lighting or that Bryce can't be made not to render this way. That's not to say that differences between render engines don't exist - but standard methods for surface shading and direct lightings are mostly identical across the board. > Quote - I am jealous of that lucid quality Max renders seem to have. Poser renders seem flatter and more "translucent" than "clear and deep" if that makes any sense.

Can you provide example images of the look you want? The default light set in Poser gives you a comparably dull look. For a quick experiment, take the default light set and set the intensity of all the lights to 170% and see what a difference it makes for your renders.

dphoadley, quick and easy way to improve hard edges is in postwork, probably faster than fiddling with lights (though that is a fine challenge in itself -- just that not everyone cares to do it). feather and blur the hard edges a little bit. you can do most of that with filters, no need to trace carefully over each edge, which would be tedious. are you familiar with masks and selections in photoshop, or do you want a step-by step? after that you might have to go in by hand and do some blurring of strong edges within the body as well, but the first step alone will improve the looks of it a lot; see above where the only blurring i did by hand was of the lines underneath the breasts.

I have no doubt that exceptional renders are possible in P6, and these will be much easier for the average user to achieve in P7. however, I see rendering as Poser's biggest problem, whose best solution is to pose the characters/scene in poser, then export to a real renderer. many years ago, when people were griping about how lousy things looked in a P4 render, I tried to convince them not to bog down the poser 5 code with alotta fake rendering gimmicks and quirks that would easily defeat their client base, and just leave it like larry intended it. but they gave in to the demands and tried to add full rendering functions. hence it became a self-fulfilling prophecy - the rendering functions are too complex for new users, they're several years behind the curve, and the typical render by the typical user still has the dreaded "poser look" that 3D snobs are fond of ridiculing.

Stewer has a point - default settings do go an awfully long way to determining the image quality. But I don't think it's the WHOLE story.

Momodot, I think the differences you are seeing are partly due to the effort put in, partly due to how difficult the program makes certain things, and partly due to technical differences between renderers.

As Pleonastic says, some people don't care to "fiddle" with lights. (Which to me sounds almost like saying some painters don't like to "fiddle with" drawing or mixing colors. But I guess that's true too.) But to get a great quality render, you must do more than fiddle with lights - you must control them very precisely.

Poser takes its "twist the dials" metaphor for adjusting figure settings and applies it to other objects such as cameras and lights. IMHO, this is a HORRIBLE workflow for lights. Yes, you can get around it, and some people do great work with Poser's lighting, but the fact is that many people stick with default lights 'cause setting up good lighting in Poser is a way more of a chore than it should be. It's difficult to add lots of lights and control them efficiently. It's difficult to make changes to multiple lights, or even select them!

So while Poser makes posing characters easier than it would be in Max, setting up good lighting is much harder. If good lighting in Max = x amount of effort, then good lighting in Poser is more like 4x, 8x or even x^2 amount of effort! And the same may be true of render time. Poser's renderer starts to get quite pokey if you have too many lights in your scene.

I think there are also probably differences in the renderers that also contribute. Speed is definitely one. Having to wait forever to see your product is a big disincentive, especially when Poser's preview is SO far from true to the way the final output will look. Stewer may be right that standard methods are used in all renderers, but I'd imagine the differences come into solving the hard problems - subtle interactions of light, shadow and color; tweaking the engine output to get that extra degree of realism, squeezing every last bit of performance out of the rendering code so that you can render more detail or get results faster... All these things take time and money. You're not likely to get the same performance out of a $200 product that you are out of a $5,000 or $10,000 product.

• Jimdoria  ~@>@

You can get some good HDRI results in Poser:

http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=1217007

You just really have to play with lighting in order to get them.

Above is a sample P6 render. It seems chalky to me.

Then there are these MAX renders of interiors that look brilliant but the model rendered in P6 looks cartoonish. Here is a sample MAX render taken at random from the galleries.
http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=1215664&Start=1&Sectionid=9&filter_genre_id=23&WhatsNew=Yes

I both wonder what I can do to improve my renders and why the different apps make different looking renders. I can't afford any thing like Max or even a cheaper render app. I did buy Hexagon for $2 but I have not tried yet to import a Poser scene. The look I am after is photographic rather than super-real, thus the strong shadows on an interior etc. The film grain is looking mannered now... is there a digital noise equivalent now? JPG artifact? :)

Thank you for the responses so far

I end up doing stuff like this to my renders in post-work.

one thing i notice, looks like raytraced lighting? maybe i'm just spoiled by carrara
but the room looks like its lit by indirect light, rather than direct, and poser is limited
to direct light only, which brings some differences right off

also poser 5 while not having IBL like P6, you can still fake it with 2 lights and a bit
of skill in the mat room, adding a nice flat global light to the scene, not as controlable
though as P6 IBL, but when no IBL, its better than nothin :)

and I've seen renders done in max, maya, P5/6, carrara, and more
if the artist is good, the end result can be literally anything, might require more worrk
but in the end, no render engine really created a better pic, just mats/lighting/etc

I find IBL to make things look like they have radiant rather than reflected light so I can only use it at very low intensity mixed with other lights at stronger settings. I have been using spots and point lights. All the lights in the above render were placed in the virtual room in rational positions where lights would be... more often I place the primary light where the camera flash would be with a simulated 80/20 split bounce. Often I place non shadow infinite lights very dim in a circle around the scene and beneath to light the ceiling to simulate the bounce of light off the floor but this was not the case in the render above where I had a weak IBL just inside the door at our left, a mid intensity spot from the ceiling lamp  location above and to the front of the figure, and the primary being a pinlight where as a slave flash might be mounted high on a tripod somewhat to the right of the camera, a set up I used in real world photography for a "documentary look". I do not like how the shadows overlap, I like the shadow from the primary but I have to move that wide spot from the center of the ceiling to closer to the door to get an opposite diagonal to the shadow, also that shadow should be weaker.

But can you see how my render looks chalky compared to :
http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=1215664&Start=1&Sectionid=9&filter_genre_id=23&WhatsNew=Yes

Also I don't get the nice ambient occlusion on the walls with Poser 6 that I see in even the simplest room scene done in Max. How do the different render engines calculate a scene?

The render you have shown that was done in Max looks to be achieved using Indirect Lighting, through a GI render engine like Vray, MentalRay, FinalRender, or perhaps Brazil.  3dsmax has a wide selection of render engines at it's disposal, and although similar in function, each one has it's own strengths.

Stewer is correct in that most render engines use the same basic principles when it comes to rendering technology, and can all pretty much achieve the same level of output given the proper materials and settings.  However, the difference between the render engines that 3dsmax utilizes vs. the one Poser uses is mostly in the area of "physically correct" lighting and raytracing.  While there is still no render engine that can truly reproduce the highly complex effects of real light interaction in a render, since it would be FAR to computationally expensive for today's hardware, there are some engines, like the ones used by 3dsmax, that can account for fairly complicated things like multiple light bounces, scatter,  and color bleeding (things Poser is not capable of without clever faking, or workarounds... and even then, it will not be quite as accurate).

Ambient occlusion and IBL are techniques that essentially fake Global Illumination.  They're handy because they provide similar results in far less time.  HOwever, they do not account for light bounces, or indirect illumination.  It would take a very complex light setup to simulate multiple bounces, and even then the results may not be as pleasing as the "real thing".  Also, raytracing in Poser's render engine is very slow and dirty compared to these other renderers, making things like glass, metal, water, etc. harder to duplicate.

---

Tools :  3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.

Here you can see I have no idea how to make IBL work... they all look like this no matter what map or settings.

Here the IBL is replaced by a point light.

Here they are blended. I like the point light more... the IBL seems terribly strange to me.

The first thing I noticed with all of these renders is that the image quality is poor.  I think that has far less to do with the renderer than it has to do with file compression and lighting.  I was able to get fairly decent results using the P4 renderer, and never had the advantages that Pro Pack had, but went straight to P5, and now P6.

You're right, you can't get the same results with the P4 renderer as you will get with Max, but you can get decent results (certainly much better than those you have posted), and then use postwork to polish the image.  There are some very nice lights in freestuff by Snowsultan, and others that will really help, but also make sure you save your renders at the best quality compression.  I always used the PSD format to export for my working files, then finished them up in PSP or PS.

Attached Link: IBL tutorial

IBL lighting by itself is far too ambient. It brings out a lot of details, but it makes everything look flat.  Try lowering the intensity of the IBL (which does not have any specular capabilities BTW), and add a spotlight for shadows and specularity.

This is a straight P6 Firefly render.  No postwork, using one IBL low intensity light ( with a peach and warm yellow radial gradient style image used as the source image, and a lilac colored spotlight:

If I can get these results without postwork, so can you.  It just takes some practice.

There is alo a great tutorial at RDNA by Olivier in the P6 forum on how to get the most out of IBL and AO lighting

poser 5's rendering engine is actually quite good (if slow)

 

here's a little room i made...original render was at 1600 x 1200 about a year and a half ago.  probably nine lights if i remember correctly.  all textures are photographic. this image took about not quite 10 minutes if i remember correctly because of the curtains.  they are simply poser cloth planes with bits of it stitched together by export and reimported, resting on the curtain rod and clothified.  i used a trick to push the pieces together to get the folds.  i did not make the chairs or the poser box, but everything else.  many mistakes on this but i learned a lot.

 

i love the postwork momodot.

elenorcoli, thanks. Your render has that clarity.

Momcat, thanks for the URL. :)

Here is an interesting effect. I blended just the shadow from the IBL/AO to the point light render. Not realism obviously but a strange Wythe quality.

Attached Link: Pure Dynamic Poser

You can get some fantastic images out of poser 6, if you take the time to configure it all up.

this image took 10 hours, from start to finish, including rendering time (which was about 2 and a half hours)

Follow the link for more details on it.

TemplarGFX
3D Hobbyist since 1996
I use poser native units

167 Car Materials for Poser

Poser 6's renderer can make very nice pictures, if you don't use the canned render options. Usually I use raytracing, AO, a very fine "Min. Shading Rate" (to get rid of the grainy look), and realistically put up shadows (RL shadows have blurry outlines, and are not black, except in outer space). Unfortunately, when using all this Firefly gets very slow. I often have render times of several days, on a 4 GHz with 2 GB of RAM... Add atmospherics, and you can have a render running for over a week... Similar pics in Vue 5 take a couple of hours.   sigh

Anyway, to get a good result it takes knowing how Firefly will react, but it's not very difficult to learn. P6 has some quirks (strange behaviour of IBL and point lights, artefacts in AO) but you'll find quickly the way to bypass them and get the result you want.
I'd say, comparing the prices of Poser and Max, I think Max does a very bad job in rendering!...  :-D

Now, if only e-froniers would decide to fix Poser's memory problems so we can actually use it (for making a little more than naked Vickies in a temple with a sword...)
Poser is actually my favorite renderer.

I think AO applied to the lights takes far more time than is necessary.  If you apply AO to only those materials that need it, you get a far more efficient render.

Neat trick!
Your link above "Pure Dynamic Poser", contains session information.  The forum software rewrote it to redirect to the microsoft home page.

http://http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=1218918

 

LOL, hmm, there doesnt seem to be an edit button in this new forum. thats stupid

TemplarGFX
3D Hobbyist since 1996
I use poser native units

167 Car Materials for Poser

Quote - I think AO applied to the lights takes far more time than is necessary.  If you apply AO to only those materials that need it, you get a far more efficient render.

Yes, I forgot to mention it; BTW I use the AO Setup script you can buy here in the marketplace.

Quote - Your link above "Pure Dynamic Poser", contains session information.  The forum software rewrote it to redirect to the microsoft home page.

The problem is the "http://http//" beginning of the link. "Http.com" redirects to Microsoft...  :-D

I have an edit option at the bottom of my post.  There are 3 options:
quote, edit my post, and delete my post

I still get redirected to microsoft.  How strange...oh..it's because you have a double instance of "http", lol

Quote - I have an edit option at the bottom of my post.  There are 3 options:
quote, edit my post, and delete my post

That dissapears for older posts. You're allowed to edit only recent posts...

Quote - I still get redirected to microsoft.  How strange...oh..it's because you have a double instance of "http", lol

Yes, and "http://http.com" is a Microsoft site... The browser thinks the second ":" is a port number, and the following // is a series of subfolders without names...

Quote - If ya want that Uber realism Max can provide you may want to try Carrara 5 Pro as it has a fantastic renderer and is amazingly adept at importing Poser scenes, props, figures etc. 

I've been using it for a while now and I love it!

Gerard

I'm sorry Gerard, but Carrara's renderer is no where near that of Mental Ray (which is the renderer within Max). I have yet to see a Carrara render approaching anything like the look of Mental Ray.
If you want Max type renders then pick an app with Mental Ray included (Max, Maya or XSI).
The reason why there are so many renders is because they all have their own unique signature.

Cheers

 

Website: The 3D Scene - Returning Soon!

Twitter: Follow @the3dscene

YouTube Channel

--------------- A life?! Cool!! Where do I download one of those?---------------

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=1176862

I rather like P6's renderer. This picture from my gallery is no postwork, one IBL (following the tutorial at RDNA) and two spotlights. Rendertime took about 2 hours.

Oh!  Very nice.  The kitties look a bit flat though.  Are they composited in?
I just purchased Glow Worm by Poseworks. I don't know how I ever got on without it.  It really enhances the render power of the Firefly engine with the ability to do multiple render passes, including a depth pass.

I agree with elenorcoli - Poser 5 using the Firefly renderer gives pretty good renders. I do all of my renders in P5. I would like to use P6 but it's just too damn slow on my poor old 'puter :) With that being said however, I could never get the lighting effects in my renders direct from Poser but I rely heavily on Photoshop for adding those effects in postwork.

The secret is to render your image a bit dark in Poser and then use the Curves, Brightness & Contrast and the Hue & Saturation tools to get a more favorable overall tone for your image. Then add the shadows and light areas with the burn and dodge tools respectively to enhance the highlights.

One of the advantages with MAX lighting is that you can specify which objects get lit by each light and more importantly - which objects don't get lit. This gives you much finer control over the lighting of your scenes and this would have been a nice enhancement to Poser lighting. I suggested it as a product enhancement but it has not implemented yet and there is no reason to believe that it will be added to Poser 7 - too bad.

Quote - I would like to use P6 but it's just too damn slow on my poor old 'puter :)

Don't be sad, it's very slow on my poor new computer too...  :-D

Primary advantage of Firefly isn't speed, nor stability, unfortunately. It's that you get a simple tool perfect for newbies, with enough advanced option to cater for the veterans.
It's easy to learn too. A year ago I was a perfect Poser newbie; A year later I don't think there is some rendering option of Poser I don't know well.

I suppose you're right cheers...

 

I bought Max 7 right when it came out (after using Max3.1 for years & years) and I only use it for modelling and rarely render in anymore. 

 

What I was suggesting really was for something "Next Level" for rendering I thought Carrara would certainly kick it up a notch or two and yes I do admit not to Max's level but pretty much surpassing firefly and the P4 renderer bigtime!! 

 

I have a project on the go and am seriously considering Carara to render in as I love the crisp lighting and level of realism it provides (the hdri too!!) , also the flawless Poser scene imports helps!!!  If  I wanted to render in Max I'd have to go Bodystudio or some other type of plugin that I don't need as it's built in to Carara 5 Pro. 

 

For it's price (In my humble opinion) Carara is really a bang for your buck!!  Especially seeing that for Max 7 and Final Render Stage I plopped down almost 6 large and C5 Pro was 10% of that!

 

Thanks!

Gerard

 

Quote - > Quote - If ya want that Uber realism Max can provide you may want to try Carrara 5 Pro as it has a fantastic renderer and is amazingly adept at importing Poser scenes, props, figures etc. 

I've been using it for a while now and I love it!

Gerard

I'm sorry Gerard, but Carrara's renderer is no where near that of Mental Ray (which is the renderer within Max). I have yet to see a Carrara render approaching anything like the look of Mental Ray.
If you want Max type renders then pick an app with Mental Ray included (Max, Maya or XSI).
The reason why there are so many renders is because they all have their own unique signature.

Cheers

The GR00VY GH0ULIE!

You are pure, you are snow
We are the useless sluts that they mould
Rock n roll is our epiphany
Culture, alienation, boredom and despair

Quote - > Quote -

I'm sorry Gerard, but Carrara's renderer is no where near that of Mental Ray (which is the renderer within Max).

Cheers

Sadly, I prefer the default scanline renderer in Max to Mental Ray....    That's why I bought Final Render Stage!! 

 

Gerard

The GR00VY GH0ULIE!

You are pure, you are snow
We are the useless sluts that they mould
Rock n roll is our epiphany
Culture, alienation, boredom and despair

"Sadly, I prefer the default scanline renderer in Max to Mental Ray...."

I'm not surprised.  Max's scanline is actually faster than MentalRay at certain things, but not nearly as deep or dependable..  In fact, other than PRman, I can't think of any renderer out there that can match MentalRay's depth and flexibility.

If you do only stills, then honestly, any renderer should suffice.  Animation is what seperates the "men" from the "boys" as far as renderers go.  Scanline is great for NPR rendering, but it falls way short and has lots of problems when dealing with realistic animated rendering projects.

Poser 6 still has some problems when dealing with animation as well.  There are workarounds, but I'd rather not even deal with them.

---

Tools :  3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.

Poser 6 is an animation disaster zone. so painful, so slow, so unoptimized for animation rendering....

I wish there was just a mental ray renderer that was stand alone. max is too different from the apps Im used to, and using it to simply render my scenes is too difficult for my old brain.

TemplarGFX
3D Hobbyist since 1996
I use poser native units

167 Car Materials for Poser

Quote - Poser 6 is an animation disaster zone. so painful, so slow, so unoptimized for animation rendering....

I wish there was just a mental ray renderer that was stand alone. max is too different from the apps Im used to, and using it to simply render my scenes is too difficult for my old brain.

There is a MentalRay standalone, but no way to export Poser scenes to it.  If there was a way to export Poser scenes to .mi, like there is a way to export to .rib, then we'd be in business.

http://www.mentalimages.com/

---

Tools :  3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.

well, you I could export the objects to OBJ format, then, using polytrans batch convert them to mi format. hmm interesting

TemplarGFX
3D Hobbyist since 1996
I use poser native units

167 Car Materials for Poser

One thing I notice about poser gallery compared with other renderers is that most (if not all) of the images look dark in poser. Even that one above looks darkish to me. Max renders have a crispness and brightness just not seen in poser scenes. Love esther

MY ONLINE COMIC IS NOW LIVE

I aim to update it about once a month.  Oh, and it's free!

Quote - One thing I notice about poser gallery compared with other renderers is that most (if not all) of the images look dark in poser. Even that one above looks darkish to me. Max renders have a crispness and brightness just not seen in poser scenes. Love esther

See my post above - simply make the Poser lights brighter. You can turn up the intensity beyond 100%. It often helps to open your rendered image in Photoshop to look at the histogram (it's the graph you see in the Levels dialog) to see how the brightness distribution is in your image. Jeremy Birn's digital lighting and rendering book has some good tips about that.

i don't think it helps, things get so bright in poser when u do that that detail is lost whils something bout the pics still look dark - i can't really explain it. love esther

MY ONLINE COMIC IS NOW LIVE

I aim to update it about once a month.  Oh, and it's free!

Can you show examples?

to me the whole of the galleries looks dark when compared with galleries of other renderers. Just poser stuff in general always looks dark to me. Love esther

MY ONLINE COMIC IS NOW LIVE

I aim to update it about once a month.  Oh, and it's free!

I'm not sure that this can be taken as an indication of the program's capabilities: Consider that the lighting skills of the average Poser gallery contributer are usually not as elaborate as the lighting skills of those who typically post in the 3ds max or Maya galleries. Many chose to use Poser exactly because of that - they don't have to learn lighting to get the images they want out of Poser. On the other hand, people that invest several grands in high-priced applications often do that with the ambition of learning 3d and every detail that comes with it, and are thus much more into tweaking the lighting and render settings than users who are satisfied with whatever light set came with their pose. Just counting the number of images in the Poser galleries without shadows tells me how few users pay attention to lighting.

That sounds vaguelly plausable. But isn't poser actually limited in the number of lights one can have in a scene anyway? Love esther

MY ONLINE COMIC IS NOW LIVE

I aim to update it about once a month.  Oh, and it's free!

Not that I was aware of. The preview is restricted to the OpenGL limit of 8 lights, but I have rendered scenes with far more than 100 lights.

ah yes, it's just the preview. Quite right. Love esther

MY ONLINE COMIC IS NOW LIVE

I aim to update it about once a month.  Oh, and it's free!

what about reflection? Turning up reflection in other renderers kinda makes the renders look airy and shiny and bright and real (I have vue and carrara). I haven't tried it in poser. Love esther

MY ONLINE COMIC IS NOW LIVE

I aim to update it about once a month.  Oh, and it's free!

The edit option goes away 15 minutes after the post is posted.

Before they made me they broke the mold!
http://home.roadrunner.com/~kflach/

Quote - I'm not sure that this can be taken as an indication of the program's capabilities: Consider that the lighting skills of the average Poser gallery contributer are usually not as elaborate as the lighting skills of those who typically post in the 3ds max or Maya galleries. Many chose to use Poser exactly because of that - they don't have to learn lighting to get the images they want out of Poser. On the other hand, people that invest several grands in high-priced applications often do that with the ambition of learning 3d and every detail that comes with it, and are thus much more into tweaking the lighting and render settings than users who are satisfied with whatever light set came with their pose. Just counting the number of images in the Poser galleries without shadows tells me how few users pay attention to lighting.

I agree with Stewer on this.

When I spent the money on 3dsmax a few years ago, I made it a point to learn every aspect of 3d that I possibly could... from lighting to modelling.  It just made sense, considering the sizable financial investment in the application and it's purpose in my toolbox.  Poser still comes in handy in a pinch when creating certain items from scratch is too time consuming for a project, but most of the people I know who work with Max, and other apps like it, have a much deeper understanding of the overall 3D process than those who utilize Poser as their one and only 3d tool.  This is especially true when it comes to things like lighting a scene.

---

Tools :  3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.

Some interesting points in this thread, and good suggestions as well.. To this i would add that lighting isnt as simple a thing as many people think, it is a complex artform in itself and not everyone is (or even wants to be) naturally good at it. However the lighting in any scene (no matter which renderer you use) plays a crucial role in the final look. Everything from the positioning, color, brightness etc can make or break the image so you shouldnt ignore it.

So my suggestion is that anyone who feels that their scene is flat or chalky or just uninteresting should get a decent book on lighting techniques. Jeremy Brin's "Digital lighting and rendering " is the industry standard guide on lighting and one of the best books to get on this topic (The guy works at Pixar, what else do you need to know) It is written in a very nice informal manner and never becomes too technical. It isnt specific to any particular software either so you can apply its ideas and settings anywhere. There are also many free tutorials around that cover the basics if you just want a quick look. This is probably a much more sensible thing to try before you dump your current renderer only to find that you get similarly bad results in the next one you pick, because frankly until you know just what is wrong with your image, you wont get better results no matter where you go.

> Quote - Jeremy Brin's "Digital lighting and rendering " is the industry standard guide on lighting and one of the best books to get on this topic.

Didn't know Birn wrote a book about this

I couldn't find anythin on "Jeremy Brin" at amazon.com. Any idea where I can find that book?

Before they made me they broke the mold!
http://home.roadrunner.com/~kflach/

It's Jeremy Birn, and the book is available at amazon.

Ahh Thanks!

Before they made me they broke the mold!
http://home.roadrunner.com/~kflach/

Attached Link: http://www.3drender.com/light/index.html

Here is the link to the book's web site.

This is done with one pointlight with 100%  and 3 spots with 15%, all lights plain white. No IBL, no AO. Postwork: Color correction and a very soft gaussian filter.

---

Well she could be standing in shadow, but behind her is some outdoors with what appears to be sun, and it just does not look as bright and crisp as sunlight in max renders. However, it is a great render and I really like it. WEll I don't think many of us will be buying max because of the price, I know I won't so it is good to get the hang of what we have and try and get the best out of it. You are certainly getting the best from poser as far as I can see. Love esther

MY ONLINE COMIC IS NOW LIVE

I aim to update it about once a month.  Oh, and it's free!

Ok, what about this one? I think most pictures apearing so dark in Poser because the "shadow-dial" is set too high. In this picture all lights have shadows set to 0.2-0.4.

Rendered with P5, only spotlights are used.

---

That certainly looks closer to max quality. Maybe the shadows is part of the problem. Love esther

MY ONLINE COMIC IS NOW LIVE

I aim to update it about once a month.  Oh, and it's free!

(the plant in the above pic is P4-mode. Means: no shaders, only plain texturemaps)

---

Just rendered to show what P5 can :) Only one infinite light (100%, shadow=1, color white) and one spotlight (33%, shadow=0.3, color white).

The figure is completly untextured (wearing the boring standard texture) but morphed.

T-Shirt is using a simple texturemap, a highlightmap (any picture from my collection to disturb the whiteness of the texture), a displacementmap (to have some structure)  and a little bit ambiente color (light green) to soften the shadows.

---

ADP, your renders always look amazing! The dark ones as well as the light ones. As I understand it you work with few lights in a given scene and you get such clarity... this is what is called talent :)

Thanks! I just ordered it.

Before they made me they broke the mold!
http://home.roadrunner.com/~kflach/

The "secret" may be to attend how a surface response to light. P5/P6 has great capabilities with shaders.

Try to use bright highlight (with little intensity) and perhaps a little bit ambiente. It may help to avoid very deep shaded parts.

---

Quote - Ok, what about this one?
I think most pictures apearing so dark in Poser because the "shadow-dial" is set too high. In this picture all lights have shadows set to 0.2-0.4.

Rendered with P5, only spotlights are used.

I like the metal shelf in that one, but I can't understand why the plant is so dark when the rest of the objects are brightly lit?  You need some bounce lights to indicate indirect illumination.  Right now, your scene is lit too directly.  Plants have translucency, but this one seems opaque.  Even a plastic plant would have some light underneath in that kind of environment, caused by the direct light bouncing off the floor, etc..

---

Tools :  3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.

Exactly this is what the picture should show :)

The plant is "P4-mode", as I wrote before. Means simply texture as it is used in most Poser renders. The other objects are using reflections and such, done with P5-shaders. The difference is clear to see, Not only the plant but the pot also looks Poser-like :)

---

Quote - Exactly this is what the picture should show :)

The plant is "P4-mode", as I wrote before. Means simply texture as it is used in most Poser renders. The other objects are using reflections and such, done with P5-shaders. The difference is clear to see, Not only the plant but the pot also looks Poser-like :)

Ah!  Got it!  Sorry, it's early for me and I didn't read your original post correctly there.  Good work.

---

Tools :  3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.