i never used the phong node. i thougt that the specular is the better specular node.

but from the beginning i noticed that the specular doesnt look realistic . it was not where it was supposed to be. in the manual there is of course no explanation. thanks again. it says that they are both the same.
i found today this
http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?message_id=3076494&ebot_calc_page#message_3076494
*''You can also use a Phong node instead of a Specular node to drive the gradient. The difference is that Phong calculation is strongest when the surface points at the light, whereas the Specular calculation is strongest when the surface, if it would be a mirror, would mirror-reflect the light into the camera.''

Phong is on the left, Specular is on the right.

Probably the Phong type is more correct, but either works in general. Whatever you have in C4D - if you can use it to drive the diffuse color gradient, do it.

and now it makes sense. the specular node is always a little pointed in the camera. the phong node is strongest when the surface points at the light.

so i rendered two images. the light is above the ball. dont you think the phong node is more realistic?

first image above is more unrealistic IMVHO.
it would be better to test this on human skin/hair models, as that's what they want to look good in poser.

Phong shading is a superset of the Gouraud shading system, where specularity is calculated using a normal and the reciprocal of "roughness" parameter. It's a lot like Blinn shading but computationally less expensive. It's great for plastic and with the roughness spread far enough and intensity dialed down - makes great skin.

The first image (phong) looks unrealistic to me.

The reason I think it looks unrealistic is that the shadow indicates that the light is directly above the sphere, but the highlight indicates that it is beyond the sphere (since it is reflecting off the top at a very low angle of incidence).

In the second image, both the shadow and the highlight indicate that the light is directly above the sphere.

"If I were a shadow, I know I wouldn't like to be half of what I should be."
Mr Otsuka, the old black tomcat in Kafka on the Shore (Haruki Murakami)

Phong is wrong - don't use it. It was invented in the 70's because it was cheap to calculate. It did not bother calculating the angle of reflection. It simply puts the highlight pointing straight at the light. You cannot get ANY rim lighting effect from a Phong, because if the light is behind the figure, then the hotspot is behind the figure, too, not the edge. It only uses light vector and surface normal. It doesn't respect the location of the camera.

The Specular node is better, but does not accurately portray surfaces with microscopic bump like skin. But at least it gets the position of the hot spot closer to the right place. It does not produce a proper rim-light effect, because it has no concept of the Fresnel effect.

The Blinn node is the best, as it does a good job approximating the position of the hot spot and the full relationship between surface normal, light vector, and camera vector that leads to variation in hotspot shape and luminance.

Remember, specular type nodes are a cheat altogether. Blinn is the least cheat.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Note: I sometimes use the Phong node, but not to render it. I use it to find out if the surface is pointing straight at a bright light.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

thanks BB for the explanation.

what do you mean you use it to find if the surface is pointing to a bright light?

The Phong node generates its strongest output when you're on a point of the surface that is pointing to a light. So one of the ways to fake SSS is to use a Phong node to control it. Front-side SSS is strongest when the surface is NOT pointing at a light. So I can get this behavior if I make the amount of SSS (redness) inversely proportional to how much output I'm getting from a Phong node.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Phong is wrong - don't use it.

Even if your model is , in fact, wearing a very skimpy tight phong?
You still should not use it?

______________________

"When you have to shoot ...

SHOOT.

Don't talk "

- Tuco

Santicor's Gallery:

http://www.renderosity.com/homepage.php?page=3&userid=580115

Quote - The Phong node generates its strongest output when you're on a point of the surface that is pointing to a light. So one of the ways to fake SSS is to use a Phong node to control it. Front-side SSS is strongest when the surface is NOT pointing at a light. So I can get this behavior if I make the amount of SSS (redness) inversely proportional to how much output I'm getting from a Phong node.

this is different then VSS skin shader right?

the old cheat witt specular connected to a blender node?

Actually if you follow all the math in the VSS shader, this is how it works. It's just not so explicit.

In VSS PR3, the specular layer steals some light. Only what is left gets to the diffuse calculation. The diffuse layer steals some more light. Only what is left gets to the SSS calculation. So in effect, the SSS is weak when the specular is strong.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

what happens if we use only diffuse? only SSS?

In the PR3 shader if you set the PM:Diffuse Reflectivity to 1, you get no SSS, because then the diffuse layer uses all the light. If you set it to 0, then you get only SSS, because then the diffuse layer uses none of the light.

I demonstrated this in the VSS thread. This render has the diffuse layer turned off.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

i noticed i didnt ask right. what if we use only diffuse in the light. does this mean that it will use everywhere SSS?

Yes but the amount will vary.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

aha thanks.

something else.
this is from the SSS paper.
notice how the bump with SSS looks more soft? less bump?

i think we could use something like this in the skin shader. i am now playing with nodes.

VSS does that already. The more SSS you use, the less bump there is. The reason is because the SSS is less dependent on viewing angle.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

@ bagginsbill: You really ought to put your VSS shaders and such in your signature as a download, so they can be found more easily. I find these discussions educational, but always forget to find the latest shaders you're working on.:laugh: Damn my lousy short-term memory!

I cannot save the world. Only my little piece of it. If we all act together, we can save the world.--Nelson Mandela
An inconsistent hobgoblin is the fool of little minds
Taking "Just do it" to a whole new level!

Done.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Yes, I second that idea of putting those links in your sig. I've searched more than once for a link to your site.

"A lonely climber walks a tightrope to where dreams are born and never die!" - Billy Thorpe, song: Edge of Madness, album: East of Eden's Gate

Weapons of choice:

Poser Pro 2012, SR2, Paintshop Pro 8

Quote - Done.

Thank you! You are a HUGE help around here, and your work on Poser is appreciated by me. I'm sure I'm not alone in that, but can only speak for myself.

I cannot save the world. Only my little piece of it. If we all act together, we can save the world.--Nelson Mandela
An inconsistent hobgoblin is the fool of little minds
Taking "Just do it" to a whole new level!

Quote - VSS does that already. The more SSS you use, the less bump there is. The reason is because the SSS is less dependent on viewing angle.

i think it does not. i tryed now some renders and the bump is the same.

Quote - I think it does not. i tryed now some renders and the bump is the same.

Aaahh. Just tested with PR3 and you're right, it doesn't smooth it. Months ago I had a shader that did, but I changed how I fake the SSS and now it doesn't. Sigh.

It's very difficult to exactly fake the SSS. My shader cannot produce that look of translucence on a small scale. All it does is get the general large-scale color closer to that which would be produced by SSS. But to get the real effect, we need the real physics to be modeled.

It's like I'm trying to simulate the physics of a bouncing rubber ball, only my ball model doesn't flex and compress. So such a simulation would behave directionally correct in that the final trajectory of the ball would be about the same, but during the actual bounce event it behaves like a billiard ball instead of a basketball.

Similarly, the overall color of my shader is directionally correct in that the large-scale illumination looks similar to SSS, but the details are different.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

yeah i understand that we are only faking the color. but with this bump effect i think we could make it look better in close ups.

this is what i was trying. with specular or with the toon shader. the specular is better but if you use a lower specular on the light it changes .

if we could make this work then it would look more ''softer''.

Iin that setup, the bump is strongest where the specular is strong, which will maximize the bump appearance, because bump is revealed by specular more than diffuse. Don't you want to minimize it there?

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Also, this situation and similar ones have always mystified me. Why is Poser not in an infinite loop?

As you've set it up, consider this:

The specular consults the normals and the camera position and the light position.
The normals consult the geometry and the bump.
The bump consults the specular and the Spots.
The specular consults the normals and the camera position and the light position.
The normals consult the geometry and the bump.
...

Why does it work, or does it?

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

There are cases where THAT might be useful. Not for most skins, but for reptile scales and such it would kick butt.

I cannot save the world. Only my little piece of it. If we all act together, we can save the world.--Nelson Mandela
An inconsistent hobgoblin is the fool of little minds
Taking "Just do it" to a whole new level!

i actually dont know exactl what i have. i wanted to do something similar like in two pics that i posted.
in theory where the SSS is strong there should be less bump. right?

bagginsbill how would you do it or how did you do the trick with the bump?

I have no idea what Poser really use, but the Phong and Blinn model are very similar, both use the incident light angle, camera direction and the normal of the point where's the illumination is calculated. The only difference is the mathematics on how these angles are used and in both cases the mathematics are very simple and give in most of the cases the same result. In many cases in 3d engines what is called Phong is really Blinn and what is Blinn is really Phong and beside academical purism it makes no difference the confussion.
The Blinn or Phong models are very simple, give acceptable result, but are NOT physically correct.
There are many models that are physically correct and are mathematically complicated with the consequent big computation time.
The model to be used depend on the object, there do not exist an unvirsall model, the model tio be used depend on the BRDF of the object, research this term (BRDF) for more information.
For example, for metallic surface there is the Torrance model that is physically correct and produce reallistic rendwerings, but the Torrance model only worls for metallic objects. For rough surfaces you have to use other model, for dusty surfaces such as the Moon you need another model and so on.
Human skin requires another different model and is difficult and complicated for producing reallistic results (dielectric, sub surface scattering) and what is worst, human skin has hair!!! and this nobody takes into account....

Stupidity also evolves!

Kawecki,

We're not talking about the Blinn or Phong models. We're talking about the Poser Phong node, Specular node, and Blinn node.

This thread started asking about the Phong node.

As I already said (perhaps you did not read my post) the Poser Phong node does not use camera direction, only incident light angle and normal. So I said don't use it at all.

For human skin, the Poser Blinn node is closest. And I do take into account hair in my skin shaders, which generally run between 40 and 120 nodes. Or when you said "nobody" did you mean me?

That seems to be a pattern lately. Someone says "that's impossible in Poser" and it actually means "only Bagginsbill knows how to do it in Poser".

"Nobody can do it" means "Bagginsbill can do it"

"Nobody pays attention to body hair" means "Bagginsbill pays attention to body hair"

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Yeppers, BB! Your the most famous nobody around here, when it comes to node-mastery!:laugh:

Nobody is as respected as you!:lol: Sometimes, you just have to laugh at it all. You're ALWAYS educational, IMO. I like learning new things.

I cannot save the world. Only my little piece of it. If we all act together, we can save the world.--Nelson Mandela
An inconsistent hobgoblin is the fool of little minds
Taking "Just do it" to a whole new level!

i think using hair on the skin should be the last stepp. those are extreeeeeeeeeeeme mega big details for skin.
yes i know that they are there. but the basics should first be used. lighting,SSS,shadows and a good texture image.

i saw 100 renders on the internet with good skin. and they didnt use those small details like hair.

Quote - As I already said (perhaps you did not read my post) the Poser Phong node does not use camera direction, only incident light angle and normal.

As I said before, I have no idea what the Hell Poser does inside.

Phong model
Takes the incident light ray and creates a reflected ray using the normal at the point (incidence angle = relexion angle), next is calculated the angle between the reflected ray and the camera direction.
The illumination is the cosinus of this angles raised to an exponent ( the Se value in the mtl file of the obj file, or 100 - Poser's 4 dial).

Blinn model
Is calculated a ray that is half-way between the incident angle light and the camera direction, the is calculated the angle between that direction and the normal at the point.
These angle is used in the exact same way as the Phong model does.

If Pose does not use the camera direction in its "Phong" node what Poser has subverted the name Phong and have not used instead, for example, the "E-frontier" node???

Quote - think using hair on the skin should be the last stepp. those are extreeeeeeeeeeeme mega big details for skin.
yes i know that they are there. but the basics should first be used. lighting,SSS,shadows and a good texture image.

i saw 100 renders on the internet with good skin. and they didnt use those small details like hair.

As I said before. people forget and ignore that skin has hair and is not difficult to include the "hair effect".
You need not to create millions polygons of millions hair filaments, it's a waste of resources and computer power that leaves nowhere in the result.
Skin hair is not visible in normal conditions and is the person is hairy is just enough to use a good hairy texture, and a rendering that shows the hair detail is useless, for what need you to render an image that is nothing more that some few incjes of a skin?
Skin hair is only visible at the borders of the figure and only if is illuminated in certain way, so it will not be difficult for a rendering engine to create some blur outside the contour surface to simulate the effect of the difraction and scateering of the light due the hair filaments, and this effect is clearly visible in every day's life!
There's no way to create this effect using nodes, it must be done inside the rendering software.

Stupidity also evolves!

The hair effect II
And is not only the hair, it applies to many other things too.
Create a scene with only one light, put the light behind some object and render the scene. You will have a black screen.
This doesn't happen in real life. In real life you see the contour of the object and the illumination extending to the front decaying quickly as you move to the front. At the border of the silhuette you can see, depending on the object, hair, air dust, vapours,k air turbulence, translucencies, etc.
For creating this effect you need:

1- The light illumination must go above the 90 degree angle with the normal, decaying quickly above 90, but at 90 degrees is not zero.

2- To exist a zone between the very well defined ploygon surface and some distance from the polygons, only is needed at the silhuette.
This zone cannot be well defined, so it cannot be made of polygons, unless you use a transparency plane, This zone can be made with prodedural nodes,
A transparency plane can work fine, but if you change the camera angle or the light direction, you need to create another contour plane and another transparency map.

3- The plygons at the silhuette cannot be well defined, it must be somehow blury. Even if you managed to create a good transparency plane the overall result will be unreal because you will see a very sharp transition between the transparency and the very well defined plygon surface.

Solving 1, 2 and 3 you can have skin hair, clouds, glows, smoke, ghosts, fxs and many other things.

Stupidity also evolves!

yes i agree that if you have a light behind he object it should not be black.

Kawecki,

You do like to go on and on, eh?

It is not particularly helpful that you come into a thread about how to use the Poser specular nodes, shouting that you don't know anything about Poser specular implementation.

I wish you would stop. Since you said "I have no idea what the Hell Poser does inside", and since I'm trying to help people understand what the Hell Poser does inside, and since I know exactly what the Hell Poser does inside, and you seem in some cases to be "educating" or correcting me, all you're doing is confusing people and making my attempt to help people understand what to do with Poser more difficult.

Your explanation of the Blinn MODEL, for example is just not helpful. Your observation that the Poser nodes are misnamed is irrelevent.

It might have been interesting if you'd discussed the Torrance-Sparrow model, because it does attempt to do the silhouette effect, also known as rim lighting, and the Poser Blinn NODE implements the the Torrance-Sparrow model, not the Blinn model.

But throwing all these model and node names around doesn't help people - it confuses. I don't like it when I'm trying to help people and others come in to confuse them. I'm going to have to explain everything 3 times over now. The Poser Blinn node is not the Blinn model. Shut up about the Blinn model.

And next time you want to give a lecture that only 1/100th of the people reading this can derive any benefit from, perhaps it would be good to just show them a page where it is completely explained and let them read all about it somewhere else.

Like this page: http://www.siggraph.org/education/materials/HyperGraph/illumin/specular_highlights/blinn_model_for_specular_reflect_1.htm

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Quote -
I wish you would stop. Since you said "I have no idea what the Hell Poser does inside", and since I'm trying to help people understand what the Hell Poser does inside, and since I know exactly what the Hell Poser does inside

No, you don't know. If so, tell me why what you see in preview mode is not the same of what you see in the rendering. It's obvious that the preview and render illumination models are different, why???, it's anoying!!

Quote - It might have been interesting if you'd discussed the Torrance-Sparrow model, because it does attempt to do the silhouette effect, also known as rim lighting, and the Poser Blinn NODE implements the the Torrance-Sparrow model, not the Blinn model.

For what, the Torrance model is too complicated and is only valid for metallic surfaces.
Maybe the Poser's Torrance node or Blinn as you call it has nothing to with the real Torrance BRDF model.
One more confussion and missuse of names???

Quote - And next time you want to give a lecture that only 1/100th of the people

Wel, for 1/100th of the people is useful, I never pretended to be populist, I let this task to the

I have an useful link too:

http://www.realtimerendering.com/

Stupidity also evolves!

NOTE:
In the real Torrance model does not exist diffuse, ambient and specular components, it only exist the Totrrance BRDF and nothing more.

Stupidity also evolves!

Quote - It's obvious that the preview and render illumination models are different, why???, it's anoying!!

Because the preview (whether it's being done by OpenGL or SreeD) can't be the same a raytraced render.
How close it can get depends on what effects can only be done at render time, e.g. displacement and full shader evaluation.

@ kawecki - bagginsbill has an abrasive way of making a point -- I hope he won't mind me saying so, knowing that I would not change him -- but I'm afraid he is right: this is not the place for in-depth explanations of lighting models that are not implemented correctly, or at all, within Poser. They are a very unwelcome distraction.

Those who are interested can read up about them elsewhere.

We know that Poser is an inexpensive and far from perfect 3D modelling tool, but in knowledgeable hands it can do a reasonable job, and that is what we are trying to learn here. BB's claim that he has an in-depth knowledge of the program is not exaggerated or boastful -- it's a simple fact.

So, with respect for your knowledge in other fields of expertise, please let's keep the discussion to what we can do with Poser, and how to do it.

Thank you
Izi

"If I were a shadow, I know I wouldn't like to be half of what I should be."
Mr Otsuka, the old black tomcat in Kafka on the Shore (Haruki Murakami)

Quote - > Quote - It's obvious that the preview and render illumination models are different, why???, it's anoying!!

Because the preview (whether it's being done by OpenGL or SreeD) can't be the same a raytraced render.
How close it can get depends on what effects can only be done at render time, e.g. displacement and full shader evaluation.

Is not so simple, raytracing use an illumination model, OpenGL use an illumination model, any software renderer as Poser4 also does. If all use the same illumination model the scene will look the same, the only difference is the quality, detail and size of the rendering.
You needen't displacement, antiallialing, perfect shadows in preview mode, you only need the preview to look similar to the final hi-quality render, so you can place and pose the objects for making your scene and not to use trial and error method trying to guess how your image will look.
There are some things that only can be done with raytracing, but if you look in the gallery images is very rare to find miirors and refractions and so what can be only done with ray tracing is seldom used.
I am speaking of a simple figure with a floor and background illuminated by one directional and two spot lights, no displacement, no bumps, no mirrors, no refractions, no special fxs even no shadows, nothing that requires raytracing, all can be done in real time, the image should look the same in OpenGL, Poser4 preview, Poser4 render and firefly render, but it is not.
But the result using raytracing or the old Poser4 render is almost the same. The only conclussion that I can reach is that Poer's raytracing use the same illumination model of the not-raytracing Poser4 and inherited all the problems of Poser4.

Stupidity also evolves!

Quote - So, with respect for your knowledge in other fields of expertise, please let's keep the discussion to what we can do with Poser, and how to do it.

Many things can be done with Poser. I almost do all my rendering in POser and still in Poser4!!! without any post-work, you have nearly 500 images in my gallery and all were done with Poser and many things were done, some are very good.
I love Poser, is a good software and easy to use, but for making something in Poser you must to know the limitations of Poser, what Poser does in the wrong way, how things work and find a way to cheat Poser for making it do what you wants.....

Stupidity also evolves!

Okay, this thread is all yours, I'm signing off now. Bye.

"If I were a shadow, I know I wouldn't like to be half of what I should be."
Mr Otsuka, the old black tomcat in Kafka on the Shore (Haruki Murakami)

Kawecki. With all due respect.. are you claiming that the Poser 4 renderer is as good as Firefly in BagginsBill's hands?

If so, then I'm off with Izi. That's just plain ridiculous.

Granted, NICE renders can be made with the basic Poser 4 renderer - but it can never ever be as good as a proper raytracing engind. Don't believe me? Then do ANYTHING with reflections. (not talking about faked stuff and postwork, but make me a real working mirror in Poser 4 and I'll be convinced.

Also.. please take a deep breath before hammering away. The typiong errors and such doesn't make it easier to understand.

(and yes I know you're not a native english speaker. Neither am I. And I recognize the errors I make when I'm agitated)

Quote - Granted, NICE renders can be made with the basic Poser 4 renderer - but it can never ever be as good as a proper raytracing engind.

Why not?, raythracing is not superior to other rendering methods. Raytracing is one redering method that thal allows you easily do some things, (at the expense of rendering time) that are very difficult to do with other methods.

Quote - Don't believe me? Then do ANYTHING with reflections. (not talking about faked stuff and postwork, but make me a real working mirror in Poser 4 and I'll be convinced.

Real mirrors is one of the things, probably the only one, that can be done easily with raytracing and very difficult to do with other methods.
But...., on the other side it's impossible to render real clouds with raytracing!!!!....
It doesn't exist a superior rendering method, it are only methods each one with its advantages and disadvantages, where can be used and where can't be used and with personal preferrences.
Are oil paintings superior to acuarela, acrylic or DaVinci's uncoventional methods?????

Stupidity also evolves!

M4 says:

My AO is raytraced. My shadows are raytraced and have realistic penumbra. My specular is the Blinn node. I took two minutes to render on a crap laptop.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

M4 says:

I just looked at myself with the P4 renderer. My skin still looks good, but I don't have AO and now my eyes don't look as real as the rest of me. I have nostril glow. The depth-mapped shadow under my arm looks fake and my ear doesn't cast a proper shadow, nor does my nose. I took about the same time to render, unless I was to give up anti-aliasing, which would totally suck.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

since when has poser 4 got all the bells and whistles of poser 7, ok poser7 may not be a great renderer but its better than Poser4,so i cant see why anyone would be moaning about posers rendering when they are not even on a current version, and why the hell are you moaning at us?
oh and BagginsBill also pointed out (in the last post) why anyone using P4 has crap renders....

Getting old and still making "art" without soiling myself, now that's success.

It's amazing how small details are important when you notice them.

For example, if viewed alone, this P4 render seems very good (at least to a n00b like me) and it's already above my rendering skills.

Then you compare it with the Firefly render.... and you realize that actually is quite bad. The eyes are the first important difference, and the shadows are just another league.

Giorgio

giorgio_2004 here, ksabers on XBox Live, PSN and everywhere else.

I dont see how anyone can seriously think that the P4 renderer is anywhere near firefly in terms of rendering. Firefly may not be the best in its class, but it has a node based shader system, supports multiple threads (and rendering in a separate process), AO and IBL, support for HDRIs, as well as 64 bits if you have PPro. All of these are big improvements over P4.

P4 is better then firefly in what ? Less wear and tear on your CPU ??

Also this:

Quote - But...., on the other side it's impossible to render real clouds with raytracing!!!!....

Is totally wrong. Most apps that do volumetrics, use what is called raymarching (or volumetric ray casting), a modified version of raytracing. It's modified in that it not only calculates the start and end points of each 'ray' but also over the path the ray travels. This let's you take 3D procedurals and render them as solids of varying density, giving you a basic 'cloud.' That's how everything from vue to mentalray to lightwave does it.

Small clarification ... my P4 render above was using Firefly node-based materials. Otherwise, the skin would NOT have a proper Blinn specular or SSS or gamma correction, all of which were key to getting the skin to look right.

The point I was hoping to make is that even when you let the P4 renderer use Firefly's nodes, which takes away one advantage of Firefly, the handling of shadows is enough inferior that I would never dream of using the P4 renderer for anything other than a demonstration of why it is inferior.

These sorts of details are precisely why Poser is so much maligned in larger CG circles. Users who produce naive, even bad renders, featuring pointless nudity, proudly displaying them in their gallery - that's perceived as the essence of the Poser community. I hate that.

I'm fine with big boob pictures - just try to make them look real. It's not as though I'm keeping secrets. What you see above (lights, shaders) are available as freebies from me that you can use in a couple clicks. But you have to use Firefly and you have to use ray-tracing.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

For a single object here is no difference between raytracing and any other rendering method if you use the same lights and the same mathematical model. It must be the same and can't be different, light behaves always in the same way.
The difference is when exist more than one objects and project its image over other objects or illuminate it, or the light path is bend.
In this case raytracing can provide more correct results where exist interaction between objects.
I am not speaking about shadows that can be handled in a correct way by various means, I am talking about one object illuminating or proyecting its image on other object.
When the number of objects is increased raytracing also fails to produce correct results because the number of bounces of a ray is limited to a small number due rendering time, in this case radiosity produce the correct result, but radiosity only handles illumination and not image proyection.
I am speaking in general and not of the particular implementations of firefly, Poser7 emulating Poser4 and Poser4, where each implementation has its own deficiencies (firefly is inferior to Vue)

Stupidity also evolves!

A little demo of the 4 general-purpose specular nodes in Poser.

Left to right:

Phong, Specular, Blinn, Glossy

Behind the props is a mirror. The direct view of the props shows front-lit specular and the reflections show the back-lit specular. The main light is out front, so the reflection simulaneously gives us the point of view from behind, i.e. back-lit, in a single render.

I excluded anisotropic because it is not a general-purpose effect. And no, it's not for very bright and tight speculars like on the eye. That is possible with any of the specular nodes, but not at their default values. The anisotropic node is for microscopically grooved surfaces like brushed aluminum. We'll talk about that some other time.

Notice three of the four agree on the position of the hot spot. The Phong node does not. The Phong node does not use the viewer position (camera) as part of its calculation. This places the hot spot pointing straight at the light, which is wrong.

The Specular (#2) node is the same as the Poser Surface built-in Specular. It is what most people use. It is pretty good, but not great. I use it when I'm lazy, because it's there. Notice that the back-lit specular does not spread out. It should, for a material like this that is not microscopically flat and glossy.

The Blinn (#3) is the right node to use for this type of surface. Notice that the front-lit specular is darker than the others, and the back-lit specular is brighter than the others. This is the Fresnel effect. None of the others do this on their own, although if you add enough nodes you can get them to do so. Notice also that the back-lit specular spreads out around the rim of the sphere. That's how human skin behaves, as do many other micro-bumpy surfaces.

The chief difference between the Glossy and the others is that the hot spot does not exhibit much of a gradient. The Glossy node is helpful when trying to compensate for the fact that most of our basic CG light sources behave like tiny points. The specular reflection of a tiny point is a tiny point. But a glossy surface, such as patent leather, shows in real life rather large specular reflections of light sources that are not points at all. Even a light bulb, which is pretty small, is not a point, and most real-world lighting involves fairly large circular or rectangular areas for light sources. Yet if we use a point source, we will not get a big hot spot. The Glossy node is a cheat that helps with that. It makes a large hot spot even though the physics of our model says it should be a tiny spot.

I sometimes use the Glossy node for this reason. However, as it does not exhibit the Fresnel effect, I would combine it with other nodes to make it brighter when producing a rim lighting effect.

This render is with gamma correction. Without GC, the specular effects are difficult to get right, and the reflections would be nearly invisible on most monitors.

Further, I have simply plugged in the nodes without a more sophisticated treatment that respects the conservation of energy. In most shaders, I do a bit more than simply plug in the specular node into Alternate_Specular. Let's talk about that for a bit.

There are many CG articles on the net that talk about the specular reflection and diffuse reflection. Most get the description of the effect correctly, but almost all are absolutely 100% wrong when explaining how they happen, and why they appear to be different.

Here is one that does not get it wrong, and even points out that the others do get it wrong.

The Dimensions of Color by David Briggs

I suggest that you read that article about 11 times, or perhaps more, until you can repeat everything it says with confidence and understanding.

So a specular reflection is this: Light interacts with the air-surface boundary, and bounces off immediately in a new direction which is based on the the angle of incidence. The new direction can be smeared out a bit if the surface is microscopically bumpy. This is what mirrors do almost 100%.

Diffuse reflection is this: If the light ray/photon/wave does not bounce immediately, then it enters the surface and gets aborbed by the material. It can then do several things - it can become heat (jiggle the atom more) or it can elevate an electron to a higher energy level, or it can travel around inside and do more complex things. When an elevated electron comes back to normal (and it eventually does) it will emit a new photon, with a new color, and in a new random direction. Any direction has equal probability as any other.

Notice my description of the Diffuse reflection began with a qualification; "if the light ... does not bounce immediately". Effectively what that means is that you should model the specular effect as something that can happen first, with a certain probability distribution. When specular reflection is highly likely, diffuse reflection is highly unlikely. When specular reflection is less likely, diffuse reflection is more likely.

So a super accurate handling of the specular/diffuse effect would involve combining them into one calculation where one depends on the other. Poser nodes don't quite let us do this with that kind of precision. As a cheat, I generally subtract the output of a Blinn node from the Diffuse_Value of my diffuse node in some way. This is not physically accurate, but it is more correct than doing no coupling at all.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

As an additional demonstration of the importance of respecting the color-space we're all using to look at these pictures, this is the same render without gamma correction.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Here I've moved the main light so it is coming from the right and 45 degrees up.

Observe the locations of the hot spots. The Phong node is completely inappropriate. Just don't use it.

Notice that because the front side and back side (reflection) form similar angles with the light and viewer, the front-lit and back-lit distinction is nearly gone. This is side-lit.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

These four are all Blinn at various settings. The Blinn node can accurately portray a very wide range of micro-bumpiness, from nearly smooth to craggy. (Microscopically craggy, of course. You could not see the little mountains with the naked eye.)

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Quote - These four are all Blinn at various settings. The Blinn node can accurately portray a very wide range of micro-bumpiness, from nearly smooth to craggy. (Microscopically craggy, of course. You could not see the little mountains with the naked eye.)

what if we wants a wide backlight specular and small specular infront.
then we combine one blinn and a normal specualr. right?

Leaving aside that there is no basis in reality for such a case ...

If you combine a rough Blinn and a sharp Specular, the Blinn will still produce the rough round highlight in front and a rough crescent highligh in back, and the Specular will produce a sharp round highlight in front and back. So that would be a no. Just look at my first set and imagine adding the #2 and #3 together.

What you're talking about is modulating the sharpness based on viewing angle. So you'd use an Edge_Blend (and maybe more nodes) to create a modulated setting for the eccentricity, which would be low when facing the viewer and high when facing away.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Demo.

#1 is a rough Blinn
#2 is a sharp Specular
#3 is those two added together (not a bad start for a shader for metallic car paint - this really happens!)
#4 is a modulated Blinn so its sharp in front and rough in back

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Here's how I did the modulated sharpness on #4.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

wooow.

Quote - Leaving aside that there is no basis in reality for such a case ...
.

i was thinking for wet skin.
so if we have wet skin and have a backlight it will not be wide?

No it won't. The specular effect occurs at the air-surface boundary. If the skin is completely 100% covered by water, then the skin does not meet the air at all.

Of course, that never really happens. There are droplets, and dry areas. So what you really want to do is have a droplet mask. You drive the Blinn parameters with that mask. Where there is water, use the sharp settings. Where there is no water, use the rough settings.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Droplet demo.

Observe how there are dry areas and wet areas. The dry areas have a rough weak specular. The wet areas have a strong sharp specular. These are from the same Blinn node. The variation is produced by having a droplet bump map. Instead of an actual map, I used a Fractal_Sum node. Doesn't matter how you make the map, image or procedure, the point is the Blinn handles both materials simulatenously.

Observe how the wet areas appear to be darker and more saturated. This is entirely due to the absence of a soft specular from the "skin", because the "skin" is covered by water.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Here's the droplet shader setup. I only spent a few minutes building it. If I were not doing a quick demo, I'd spend more time adjusting the parameters.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Oh the other thing this is missing is real reflection. The water would show reflections of the environment. If we added that, it would look even more real when there is a brightly lit environment.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

I did a simple scene and both Poser4 and firefly failed giving almost the same render. The scene is a simple plane (big box) illuminated from behind with a directional light at 45 degrees. The green lines are cylinders indicating the incident and reflected ray from the plane. The reflected ray should have illuminated the small box making it visible, but it didn't! I agrre with the result of Poser4, Poser4 cannot do this, but raytracing (firefly) should have done!! The bounce number was set to 4, enough for the only two bounces that exist in the scene.

Stupidity also evolves!

Quote - No it won't. The specular effect occurs at the air-surface boundary. If the skin is completely 100% covered by water, then the skin does not meet the air at all.

Of course, that never really happens. There are droplets, and dry areas. So what you really want to do is have a droplet mask. You drive the Blinn parameters with that mask. Where there is water, use the sharp settings. Where there is no water, use the rough settings.

dumb me. for wet skin you are right.
but if it is more like oil. ''oily'' ?

:)

Quote - I did a simple scene and both Poser4 and firefly failed giving almost the same render.
The scene is a simple plane (big box) illuminated from behind with a directional light at 45 degrees.
The green lines are cylinders indicating the incident and reflected ray from the plane.
The reflected ray should have illuminated the small box making it visible, but it didn't!
I agrre with the result of Poser4, Poser4 cannot do this, but raytracing (firefly) should have done!!
The bounce number was set to 4, enough for the only two bounces that exist in the scene.

you mean that the light should bounce from the reflected sourface?

of course poser doesnt support this. he he :)

exactly. thats often called Radiosity and is NOT a feature of the Firefly render engine.

-10 points to Kawecki for not reading the manual.

Is not radiosity, radiosity works in another way and radiosity doesn't deal with specular light.
It is a simple raytracing, but if you put the light in front instead of comming from behind it works in Poser.
Is raytracing sensitive to the light position???
It looks as Poser doesn't like back lights.

Stupidity also evolves!

I have 3 cars.

The BMW can go 200 miles per hour and is pretty safe, but is unable to climb rocks, won't move in snow at all, and uses a crapload of gas. Plus it cost much more than most people make in a year.

The Volvo can do 130 MPH and eat snow like crackers and is extremely safe but it still sucks quite a bit of gas and won't really climb big rocks and cost a year's pay for most people.

The Jeep is good on gas and can climb rocks, but only goes about 95 MPH before it starts to wheeze and if a truck hit me in it, I'd be dead, but it only cost $20K.

(Please do not point out to me that the speed limit where I live is 65 MPH. I like to accelerate from 0 to 30 in 1.5 seconds - merging traffic and all that.)

So I'm a bit dissatisfied with the Jeep. I'm thinking of complaining to Jeep (as well as other Jeep owners on the Jeep forum) that it isn't the rock-climbing-snow-leaping-Porsche-eating family sedan I wanted it to be. I mean, come on, they all have an engine, four wheels, a body, seats, and so on. Why don't I get all the best features in one car at the cheapest price? I don't get it.

Oh, is that off-topic? Sorry. I thought that's what we do here.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

I have a mountain bike myself....

I wish I had a mountain bike. I bought a "hybrid" bike about ten years ago. Unlike a mountain bike, it always gets stuck in sand and rocks. And unlike a road bike, it doesn't roll real super smooth on pavement, so i always have to pedal a bit harder than friends on road bikes. Really, it doesn't do anything well at all, except it was cheap.

I'm going to return it.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

I recently got a really slick digital SLR camera - Nikon D90. Prior to that I was using this Canon Powershot - nice little pocket camera - if you're a noob. I've had the pocket camera for 4 years and it always made great pictures. But now that I know the power of the Digital SLR and lenses that cost more than my annual life insurance premium, I'm kind of unhappy with the Canon.

I'm going to return it.

Still trying to figure out how to fit the 70-300 VR lens in my pocket. It's so freaking heavy, too. Why is that? Are they idiots at Nikon, making a fricking lens weigh 3 pounds?

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

A goat can climb rocks, is cheap, consume no oil at all and is ecologically correct, something very good for the global warming paranoia.
Speaking about raytracers, PovRay is for free.......

Stupidity also evolves!

A goat can climb rocks, is cheap, consume no oil at all and is ecologically correct, something very good for the global warming paranoia.

If ya got a goat there's no need for a lawnmower either.

Interesting points you've brought up, Kawecki. After all math never lies as long as we follow the order of operations.

If you want Porsche performance

wait for it ...

get Carrara!

Lotus 123 ~ S-Render ~ OS/2 WARP ~ IBM 8088 / 4.77 Mhz ~ Hercules Ultima graphics, Hitachi 10 MB HDD, 64K RAM, 12 in diagonal CRT Monitor (16 colors / 60 Hz refresh rate), 240 Watt PS, Dual 1.44 MB Floppies, 2 button mouse input device. Beige horizontal case. I don't display my unit.

Quote - Still trying to figure out how to fit the 70-300 VR lens in my pocket. It's so freaking heavy, too. Why is that? Are they idiots at Nikon, making a fricking lens weigh 3 pounds?

Think that's bad? Try this beast !
www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx

My Freebies
Buy stuff on RedBubble

Quote - Think that's bad? Try this beast !
www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx

I want to go to there.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

One thing you can say about Nikon, their glass is very well put together and is a bit cheaper than the Canon L series

My Freebies
Buy stuff on RedBubble

I am really enjoying this thread, and Thankyou Bill for explaining the nodes it has made it very clear to me,you are a Poser GOD...

Getting old and still making "art" without soiling myself, now that's success.

Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL

Subject: the phong node