Can this Reality 3 also be used for Octane (OBJ format) or is it stricktly made for LuxRender?

in the thread "no rendo art gallery for luxrender" BB states that due to posers advancement in the past year the renders from poser are as goodas that of lux,my question is why should i use an external render engine if poser is doing just as good? this question is not ment to start a fight it is purely for me incase im missing something that will take my renders to a new place.

Quote - Well I held off getting Miki3 to wait for Miki4 and I do have room for an Asian girl in my runtime so looking forward to this!

 

Yup, you have room. 8-)

Curious:

How difficult is it for a weighted male character to ah, well point north? Cause wouldn't the weight be pulling things south?

Yikes, another exciting week in the world of Poserdom!

Coop an the gang are on a roll!

Quote - in the thread "no rendo art gallery for luxrender" BB states that due to posers advancement in the past year the renders from poser are as goodas that of lux,my question is why should i use an external render engine if poser is doing just as good? this question is not ment to start a fight it is purely for me incase im missing something that will take my renders to a new place.

Almost every render engine, in the hands of someone who knows how to use it, can produce awesome results.  Some are considered better in certain area's, or types of scene's.

From the Lux wiki, "Unbiased rendering engines [like Lux] have both advantages and disadvantages - generated images are very realistic but take a long time to produce; physical correctness limits artistic freedom"

I recommend sticking with one, and learn it well, then if the mood hits you, try another, after you've mastered the first.

While having loads of fun, of course! :tt2:

Thanks to Smithmicro and all. Miki 4 and Tyler on my list. Having seen the work of both creators, I have no doubt I will be pleased.

This is going to be an exiting period for all.

Miki4, Tyler, and SR3, all on the front doorstep, close to being released into the wide open world.

Following up on another discussion:    SM, Coop and his team ARE listening to their customer base.

Some of what is coming, well;  "Eye" openers.

Clean the HD, and prepare for some wonderfull high quality Poser time.

Happy Posering you all,

Tony

Quote - I hope her full after-market potential gets realised better this iteration too... she may be best at asian, as Laurie says.

Miki 2 had the same head mesh as G2 Sydney, and could have Syd's exported head as a morph if the vertex order was corrected, but I presume that's not the case for Miki 3 and 4.

I love the Miki 2 body shape, especially the ribs and legs, but she doesn't bend well.  Miki 3 bends better, but her body isn't quite as realistic...

Quote - > Quote - Well I held off getting Miki3 to wait for Miki4 and I do have room for an Asian girl in my runtime so looking forward to this!

Yup, you have room. 8-)

Ok, I'm convinced! :biggrin:

Seriously though, I think (hope, anyway!) that Miki4 will fill in a few gaps for me that V4 and A3 don't cover well. I haven't really thought that about the other new female figures that have come out recently.

Quote - Can this Reality 3 also be used for Octane (OBJ format) or is it stricktly made for LuxRender?

No, it will be for LuxRender and SLG. The latter is a GPU-based renderer similar to Octane.

Quote - in the thread "no rendo art gallery for luxrender" BB states that due to posers advancement in the past year the renders from poser are as goodas that of lux,my question is why should i use an external render engine if poser is doing just as good? this question is not ment to start a fight it is purely for me incase im missing something that will take my renders to a new place.

That statement is inaccurate. LuxRender is physically-based and unbiased. Firefly is not. Physics play a big role in achieveing realism. For example, metals are rendered using exact physic simulations. In Reality you just have to select "Metal" as the material type and possibly a color or a texture. Alternatively there are presets for common metals like Gold, Silver, Copper etc. that's all you need to do to create extremely realistic metals. In any other biased renderer, like Renderman, Firefly, 3Delight etc you have to be a shader expert and you can only hope to get near the same result. Nevethless, even if you get there it requires skill and time that arw not available to the common user.

Lux provides other materials that are physics base. For example, glass and water are calculated using volumetric formulas. This means, among other things, that the thickness of the glass affects the color and attenuation of the light. The light that come out of the glass volume is not the same that enters that volume. There is no way of simulating that in any biased renderer. 

Other effects are also present all the time "for free" in Lux. For example, indirect lighting is automatically there. No need to simulate it with invisible distant lights. In fact indirect lighting is a major component of achieving realism. Lux provides that and much more and it's actually pretty darn fast at it.

So, achieveing realism is much easier with the help of Reality because you don't have to be a shader expert to obtain realistic materials, it's part of what LuxRender does. Plus Lux allows you to adjust lights and exposure on the fly, while you are rendering.

Hope this helps

Ugh. So many specious arguments flying around.

First of all, in the above quote, which somewhat reflects something I said in another thread, it implies all Poser renders are as good as Lux renders. I didn't say that as the statement would be too strong. I said a lot of renders, not all renders.

I said (emphasis added):

Quote - Before PP2012 came out, I was very enthusiastic about Lux. But now, in Poser, I deal with scatter and soft reflections and emitter props (which behave a lot like area lights). A lot of what I liked in Lux I'm getting in Poser now. That was not so a year ago.

I see a lot of results in Poser that are equal or better than the LuxRender results and rendered in much less time.

Your mileage will vary.

Now as to the physics of metals, I also give away or sell "presets" that happen to produce very realistic metals, so it's inaccurate to say the only way to get good metals is to be a shader expert. The only way to create them is to be a shader expert, but not to use them. You do not have to be a shader expert to get near the same result. You do not have to use LuxRender to get a piece of gold or silver to look right in a render.

Quote - For example, glass and water are calculated using volumetric formulas. This means, among other things, that the thickness of the glass affects the color and attenuation of the light.

That's true and I've long complained that Poser's refract node lacks an important feature - distance based attenuation. However, the next sentence is not accurate:

Quote - There is no way of simulating that in any biased renderer.

That's really strong, and while true of Poser today, it's not true of "any biased renderer".

The equation is simple: the color of refracted light is:

C ** (D/k)

Where C is a reference attenuation color, D is the distance the ray travels, and k is the attenuation unit distance - how far a ray must travel in order for 100% intensity white light to be attenuated to the color C.

This is easily calculated if the raytracer delivers ray length to the shader. The unfortunate thing about Poser in this case is not that a biased engine cannot compute that stupid simple equation, but that it simply does not offer the value D as part of a shader equation.

Quote - No need to simulate it with invisible distant lights.

This is purely argumentative and does not begin to accurately explain indirect light. We have no need of "invisible distant lights" in Poser, either. IDL works with visible props and visible lights.

Look - there are things LuxRender can do that you can't do in Poser. There is no question of that. When you run into one of those things, then you use LuxRender. When you don't run into one of those things, then you can use LuxRender, but you don't have to.

My original statement is accurate. The number of situations that call for LuxRender has decreased. I didn't say these situations don't exist.

I can't stand it when people confuse the words all, some, and none.

Quote - Now as to the physics of metals, I also give away or sell "presets" that happen to produce very realistic metals, so it's inaccurate to say the only way to get good metals is to be a shader expert. The only way to create them is to be a shader expert, but not to use them. You do not have to be a shader expert to get near the same result. You do not have to use LuxRender to get a piece of gold or silver to look right in a render.

The fact is that the metal preses, which are absolutely accurate and not a simulated approximation, are part of Lux and the presets are available from a dropdown menu in Reality. If you prefer to use a custom color or a texture in Reality the result is accurate metal, like anodized aluminum, without having to search and download presets from you or other Poser experts. It's built-in in Lux and built-in in Reality. 

Quote - The equation is simple: the color of refracted light is:

C ** (D/k)

That is not the full picture and not even close to what Lux does. If it was that simple then it would not be necessary to compute the volume intereaction. When using volumetric glass, what Reality labels "Hyper-realistic glass", Lux computes the density and IOR of the inside volume and the density and IOR or the outer volume. That required a new type of glass, called internally "glass2". Glass2 is an improvement from the original glass used an simpler approach but was not as physically accurate. The interaction between the two volumes allows, foe example, to have pyhysically accurate rendering of light traversing a piece of glass, then traversing a liquind inside the glass and finally traveling through the atmosphere. It's much more complex of a refraction formula and it requires accurate volume computation.

Cheers.

i did not mean to imply that BB said all poser renders are as good as those of lux, and im sorry if it came across that way. i was only trying to find out what are the benefits of lux as i have had no experience of it and have been away from the poser scene for a couple of years,so also know nothing about it.im still unsure as to weather there is any use for it?

Quote - i did not mean to imply that BB said all poser renders are as good as those of lux, and im sorry if it came across that way. i was only trying to find out what are the benefits of lux as i have had no experience of it and have been away from the poser scene for a couple of years,so also know nothing about it.im still unsure as to weather there is any use for it?

I think you should take a look at the LuxRender gallery and judge by yourself

http://www.luxrender.net/forum/gallery2.php

The focus on LuxRender is accurate realism. If that is interesting for you then you should consider it. 

Cheers.

I think the gallery is a good illustration of how much the gap has narrowed.  A lot of what is in there would have blown my mind a year ago.  Now some of it is excellent still, but some of it is just what I would expect from poser 2012 and some not even as good.    I guess thats also a good illustration of the artist needing to know how to use the tools to get the best out of it.  I'm not saying anything against lux or reality.  I think they both seem great, its just a different game to compare poser 2012 to lux than it is to compare DS to lux.   With DS (judging only by posted pictures and promos) it seems you NEED reality/lux to get realistic looking renders.  I dont know that the need is as strong for poser users, but its definitly a great option to have.

Quote - > Quote - i did not mean to imply that BB said all poser renders are as good as those of lux, and im sorry if it came across that way. i was only trying to find out what are the benefits of lux as i have had no experience of it and have been away from the poser scene for a couple of years,so also know nothing about it.im still unsure as to weather there is any use for it?

I think you should take a look at the LuxRender gallery and judge by yourself

http://www.luxrender.net/forum/gallery2.php

The focus on LuxRender is accurate realism. If that is interesting for you then you should consider it. 

Cheers.

What strikes me most looking through those LuxRender galleries is a shortage of examples featuring renders of human characters and human skin.

Does this reflect any kind of limitation of LuxRender itself? Or is this just down to the aesthetic preferences espoused in that particular gallery?

Cheers

Quote - What strikes me most looking through those LuxRender galleries is a shortage of examples featuring renders of human characters and human skin.

Does this reflect any kind of limitation of LuxRender itself? Or is this just down to the aesthetic preferences espoused in that particular gallery?

No, that reflects the lack of a tool like Reality :) Before Reality was released there were virtually no human renders. That changed when Reality 1 and 2 were released and you can see examples that are made with Reality for DS at our gallery at deviantArt:

http://reality-plug-in.deviantart.com/

Here are a few examples, many more are available in the gallery.

Can't wait to see what people will be able to do with Poser, Reality and Lux.

Cheers.

I've been hugely impressed by Poser 2012 Firefly renders - even the ones I've produced without really much idea what I'm doing with Poser lighting! When I got Poser it was mainly as a means of getting figures into Vue for rendering, but Poser renders so well I don't bother for single figures or interiors quite so much, especially as the smoothing is so good. For exteriors I love Vue and not going to change! ;)

The LuxRender images look nice, but I'm not gobsmacked by them.

WOW...that last one has to be Hellboy. That's flippin awesome ;).

Laurie

The point about SLG is interesting... or rather, relative to that, what I understand is ongoing  work to integrate / implement the GPU rendering developed for the SLG project into LuxRender itself?

Quote - The point about SLG is interesting... or rather, relative to that, what I understand is ongoing  work to integrate / implement the GPU rendering developed for the SLG project into LuxRender itself?

There is support for GPU rendering in Lux already. The way this is done is different for Lux and SLG. Lux uses the GPU to help in the computation of the rays. Because the GPU can crunch floating point numbers much faster than the faster Intel CPU, this helps substantially. On one hand this approach has limitations on how aggressively the GPU can be used, on the other hand it doesn't suffer from memory limits. SLG uses the GPU for everything and it is incredibly fast. Like all GPU-based renderers it suffers the fact that it can only use the RAM available on the GPU card and not the one installed in the computer.

Reality allows you to switch seamlessly between Lux and SLG so you have the choice to render your scene with the most appropriate renderer.

Hope this helps.

Quote - I've been hugely impressed by Poser 2012 Firefly renders - even the ones I've produced without really much idea what I'm doing with Poser lighting! When I got Poser it was mainly as a means of getting figures into Vue for rendering, but Poser renders so well I don't bother for single figures or interiors quite so much, especially as the smoothing is so good. For exteriors I love Vue and not going to change! ;)

The LuxRender images look nice, but I'm not gobsmacked by them.

 

Agree entirely.  When LUX goes bad with human skin it goes very, very bad.  I've seen several Reality renders that if it were a photograph, we would have deleted it from our camera memory card.

Poser2012 is constitent - with a skilled artist and good lights, the renders can be amazing.

what is SLG?

Paolo, can reality deal with blended nodes?

Quote - Paolo, can reality deal with blended nodes?

Doesn't matter what's set up in Poser - it's gonna get converted to a Luxrender material. And if you mean can it read a material with a bunch of nodes, I'd like to know that as well ;).

Laurie

Laurie, I assume reality uses the (basic) textures as are defined in Poser.

But can you use a composed (with a blender node) textures in reality? I assume there is a texture involved in the skin material, otherwise it would be boring with all figures having identical skins

Asked that already. We need to be patient, as he can't reveal anything until the official announcement tomorrow.

Quote - The LuxRender images look nice, but I'm not gobsmacked by them.

I dunno ... that third image is quite impressive!  Great job.

How many venders do you have making content for the new figures, or is it going to be more of the same and these end up as epic fails like the rest.

Quote - WOW...that last one has to be Hellboy. That's flippin awesome ;).

Laurie

I'd be impressed with that image even if it was a photograph. LOL

Quote - > Quote - WOW...that last one has to be Hellboy. That's flippin awesome ;).

Laurie

I'd be impressed with that image even if it was a photograph. LOL

Yes, Hellboy really has a way of getting the last drop of umph out of Reality and Luxrender...lol.

Laurie

Whether you use Poser and Firefly or Luxrender with Reality or Pose2Lux or Vue, it all boils down to how well the artist knows her tool set. And it doesn't have to cost an arm and a leg. Whilst people distribute FUD about Blender, I have yet to see anything done anywhere by anyone using anything to rival this. ETA: oh, and yes, that is Blender.

There is no easy road to excellence. And you can't buy your way there, either.

@ RobynsVeil

THAT is beautifull.

And some wise words.

"Know" your tools.

With respect, Tony

thank you, Tony.

And just as an aside here - if you want beautiful outdoor scenery then I think Terragen2 still takes some beating. I just couldn't be bothered with all the hassle of trying to plant objects in the right places, so I rarely use it any more and do everything outdoors in Vue instead.

I think it all depends on which render engine suits you and you get along with the best. Trouble is trial and error sometimes gets a bit pricey...

Quote - And just as an aside here - if you want beautiful outdoor scenery then I think Terragen2 still takes some beating. I just couldn't be bothered with all the hassle of trying to plant objects in the right places, so I rarely use it any more and do everything outdoors in Vue instead.

I think it all depends on which render engine suits you and you get along with the best. Trouble is trial and error sometimes gets a bit pricey...

Been there, smoked that, got the t-shirt... :lol:

Whatcha smoking? Gonna share? LOL

Wow, did this thread really go off the rails

Laurie

I'd quite like one of those t-shirts myself

Quote - Whatcha smoking? Gonna share? LOL

Wow, did this thread really go off the rails

Laurie

I like to think of it as elevated to an even more enlightened level... :a_grin:

Oh, I tried that - again and again and again. Never helps ;)

;)

Laurie

Quote - I'd quite like one of those t-shirts myself

You've never visited BC, I take it.

No t-shirts, though. Egypt would run out of cotton.

Quote - There is no easy road to excellence. And you can't buy your way there, either.

My debt card keeps yelling the same thing over and over :mad:

Good words of wisdom :thumbupboth:

Quote - Whether you use Poser and Firefly or Luxrender with Reality or Pose2Lux or Vue, it all boils down to how well the artist knows her tool set. And it doesn't have to cost an arm and a leg. Whilst people distribute FUD about Blender, I have yet to see anything done anywhere by anyone using anything to rival this. ETA: oh, and yes, that is Blender.

There is no easy road to excellence. And you can't buy your way there, either.

That Blender render is superb Robynsveil. My issue with Blender was originally just that it represented too steep a wall to climb first. Or seemed to.

Having learnt some more modelling etc. in other apps, like Hexagon... and now tackling ZBrush indeed... I am starting to feel more up to diving back into Blender.

Plus the Poser importer for Blender project has really come on some, since I last looked into it, end of last year... and, I know it's maybe a bit of an amateurish kind of attitude for me to hold, perhaps... but... I'll be the first to admit to being an amateur at this stuff... and having that more clearly defined bridge from Poser to Blender will help me significantly with the crossover, I think...

...so too... and I'm, incredibly, somehow, steering this thread back onto the rails here...

...so too will the GoZ integration for Poser, announced for SR3, help me substantially I think, with moving into using ZBrush.

Quote - > Quote - I'd quite like one of those t-shirts myself

You've never visited BC, I take it.

No t-shirts, though. Egypt would run out of cotton.

So, now I have a vision of British Columbia where everyone is sitting around topless, just getting stoned

Quote - ... I am starting to feel more up to diving back into Blender. Plus the Poser importer for Blender project has really come on some, since I last looked into it, end of last year... and, I know it's maybe a bit of an amateurish kind of attitude for me to hold, perhaps... but... I'll be the first to admit to being an amateur at this stuff... and having that more clearly defined bridge from Poser to Blender will help me significantly with the crossover, I think...

...so too... and I'm, incredibly, somehow, steering this thread back onto the rails here...

...so too will the GoZ integration for Poser, announced for SR3, help me substantially I think, with moving into using ZBrush.

That will indeed be an incredible addition to Poser, and something the Poser community have been asking for a LOT. BTW, the way you feel about Blender, I feel about zBrush... I had a go, but my goodness what a full-on programme. When sculpting becomes something I really want to pursue, I'll definitely have to invest. I went and purchased Argile some time ago, but found it really wasn't what I was after, and, to be honest, I really was trying to "buy excellence". And didn't have the skill to get the results I thought were just within my reach.

In the spirit of bringing the thread back on track, on the subject of SP3, anyone know which - if any - outstanding bugs were addressed?

Yup, I've found learning ZBrush, so far, a bit like trying to learn to draw (i.e. really draw, with a pencil) with my wrong hand, whilst handing upside down by my feet.

But... I'm slowly getting the UI logic into my head. It's just very different from everything else I guess... but once you start to get it, then it begins to make sense and become useable (highly useable I hope!)

I guess making this journey will ultimately make Blender seem like a piece of cake to me. I was initially put off that by the array of key strokes seemingly required to be memorized to use it, as much as anything else...

...combining that learning curve on top of learning all the actual modelling concepts new... felt too much. When I was younger I was never much cop at flight or driving sim games either, that I couldn't work entirely with game controllers, joystick or wheel etc... i.e. that I needed to overlay a function map on the keyboard to use...

...but now, I have more of an understanding of the concepts... I feel more ready for it

But yeah... bugs. Well BB has already demonstrated what appear to be scaling fixes.

I wonder if there is anything in the render engine or mat room that has been tweaked / fixed or added to...?

"I wonder if there is anything in the render engine or mat room that has been tweaked / fixed or added to...?"

Wondering that myself, MC, particularly IDL, which, in my version at least, still has issues in corners of rooms... :blink:

Hmmm... maybe they've extended the point cloud system apparently in use already for the SSS pass (by the looks of it - if the ".pcloud" file generated at that stage is what it looks like), to provide something even more comprehensive...

http://www.cgsociety.org/index.php/CGSFeatures/CGSFeatureSpecial/pixar_points

http://renderman.pixar.com/view/SSS

http://renderman.pixar.com/view/point-clouds

http://www.blendertorenderman.org/2011/10/point-cloud-indirect-lighting-in.html

http://perso.telecom-paristech.fr/~boubek/papers/QPBGI/

(above is just some of the reading I've been doing after a recent thread asking what the .pcloud file was... I liked the gist of that last research piece)

LOL :lol: Okay... nah... I'm guessing not... yet

May be bigger than a service release?

Yeah some IDL tweaks... to help reduce black or red artifacts, when Irradiance Caching is set to less than 100, would be great. Fingers crossed

Those of us who know, technically, we're not allowed to say.

However, I will show you this image. I made it last night. It is white. It has right angles. There are no splotchies. It took longer to render, sort of like LuxRender.