picnic- I had to start a new thread to upload an image, but this is what I got, after playing around abit, actually playing more than a bit, but it's still the same transparency map. I get the impression that Bryce is a much more exact rendering engine.

Glad you posted. Looks to me as though we have to be careful with our 'ambience'--you got less transparency on the top of the head. Did you do anything special?? Also, I might have gotten more transparency because I had my figure looking up so you actually almost looked under it. Did you move the hair object at all?? Looks pretty good. I like the view from the rear. Diane B

Diane- I moved the hair object around quite a lot, I can't stand that center part, but I didn't add anything. Seems to me I resaved the transmap as a smaller Photoshop file too, but that shouldn't make any difference. The hair is still too thin, see the necklace through the rear view? You wouldn't see that in real life. I shudder to suggest more layers, this thing is already a killer on Bryce render time!

That's a good idea, Allie--the adding a separate hair piece. When I used Anton's peacock in one of my images, I actually added 3 tail .objs I think because with the transmap, it just lost density. I'll have to try that. I'm going to have to play with this again. I truly wonder if I need to not select one of the head/hair pieces so as not to get that 'sheer' effect on mine. Diane B

I exported a Bryce material, but it was over 8 Mb zipped, and I'm not going to put that one up on from a modem! I did use a bump map, made from the texture, as you suggested, I remembered that just now. Good idea about the 2 hair pieces, I'll have to try it.

Jim Perhaps you could post a screen-grab of the settings in Bryce so that we can all aim in pretty much the same direction. (And yes, getting trans-mapped hair to look good in Bryce is giving me calliption fits !) Paul