 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/25/2012 8:50 AM, clipka wrote:
> Am 25.03.2012 10:58, schrieb FlyerX:
>
>> I have been having some issues with the new Subsurface Light Transport.
>> If the mesh is made up of several sub-meshes the seams between them are
>> darkened.
>
> I've never seen anything like this before with PoseRay output. (I very
> much presume you're using PoseRay for generating the POV-Ray mesh2
> objects yourself, right?)
Yes, this is a PoseRay output scene. The issue happens with all the
models that have several materials on the same mesh. PoseRay breaks the
model mesh by materials.
>
>> If I merge the mesh outside of POV-Ray into a single mesh with a single
>> material for the complete head skin then the dark seams disappear. But I
>> cannot merge the mesh outside POV-Ray since that would destroy the
>> separate UV mapping that each mesh uses.
>
> Theoretically it should be possible to merge into a mesh2 with multiple
> textures without loss.
>
>> Also the edges of the polygons are slightly visible on the forehead.
>> That was easily fixed by subdividing the mesh before rendering.
>
> That's a known problem, and difficult to fix without some significant
> internal changes to surface normal handling. At present, subdividing is
> indeed the only known workaround.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/25/2012 8:50 AM, clipka wrote:
> Am 25.03.2012 10:58, schrieb FlyerX:
>
>> I have been having some issues with the new Subsurface Light Transport.
>> If the mesh is made up of several sub-meshes the seams between them are
>> darkened.
>
> I've never seen anything like this before with PoseRay output. (I very
> much presume you're using PoseRay for generating the POV-Ray mesh2
> objects yourself, right?)
>
>> If I merge the mesh outside of POV-Ray into a single mesh with a single
>> material for the complete head skin then the dark seams disappear. But I
>> cannot merge the mesh outside POV-Ray since that would destroy the
>> separate UV mapping that each mesh uses.
>
> Theoretically it should be possible to merge into a mesh2 with multiple
> textures without loss.
>
>> Also the edges of the polygons are slightly visible on the forehead.
>> That was easily fixed by subdividing the mesh before rendering.
>
> That's a known problem, and difficult to fix without some significant
> internal changes to surface normal handling. At present, subdividing is
> indeed the only known workaround.
Here is the material I used on the skin:
#declare PR_DIFFUSE=pigment {color srgb <0.93,0.71,0.54> }
#declare F1=finish{specular 0 //Max highlight intensity: 0 -> 1
roughness 0.02203444 //surface roughness: 0.0005 -> 1
phong 0 phong_size 0 //Phong specular disabled
ambient rgb <0.00,0.00,0.00>
diffuse 0.6
reflection{0 } conserve_energy
subsurface {translucency 0.8}
}
material{
texture{uv_mapping
pigment{PR_DIFFUSE }
finish{F1}
}
interior{ior 1}
}
***and here are the global settings
global_settings {
subsurface {}
mm_per_unit 25
}
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 25.03.2012 22:19, schrieb FlyerX:
> interior{ior 1}
Not that I think it matters, but why ior 1? That would be air. Realistic
skin should be something around 1.3.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 25.03.2012 22:19, schrieb FlyerX:
> Here is the material I used on the skin:
>
> #declare PR_DIFFUSE=pigment {color srgb <0.93,0.71,0.54> }
> #declare F1=finish{specular 0 //Max highlight intensity: 0 -> 1
> roughness 0.02203444 //surface roughness: 0.0005 -> 1
> phong 0 phong_size 0 //Phong specular disabled
>
> ambient rgb <0.00,0.00,0.00>
> diffuse 0.6
> reflection{0 } conserve_energy
> subsurface {translucency 0.8}
> }
> material{
> texture{uv_mapping
> pigment{PR_DIFFUSE }
> finish{F1}
> }
> interior{ior 1}
> }
OK, here's the deal: To avoid SSLT seams between multiple objects, they
currently must /share/ a common interior - it's not sufficient to have
interiors with identical parameters, or even instances of the same
#define'd interior. The only way to achieve this is to specify the
interior in the parent CSG rather than the individual primitives.
Thus, to get the desired results, you need to:
- REMOVE any interior statements from the material.
- ADD the interior statement to the union or merge.
- For each part that needs a different ior (e.g. eyelashes or teeth) add
an individual interior statement.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/25/2012 7:37 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 25.03.2012 22:19, schrieb FlyerX:
>> Here is the material I used on the skin:
>>
>> #declare PR_DIFFUSE=pigment {color srgb <0.93,0.71,0.54> }
>> #declare F1=finish{specular 0 //Max highlight intensity: 0 -> 1
>> roughness 0.02203444 //surface roughness: 0.0005 -> 1
>> phong 0 phong_size 0 //Phong specular disabled
>>
>> ambient rgb <0.00,0.00,0.00>
>> diffuse 0.6
>> reflection{0 } conserve_energy
>> subsurface {translucency 0.8}
>> }
>> material{
>> texture{uv_mapping
>> pigment{PR_DIFFUSE }
>> finish{F1}
>> }
>> interior{ior 1}
>> }
>
> OK, here's the deal: To avoid SSLT seams between multiple objects, they
> currently must /share/ a common interior - it's not sufficient to have
> interiors with identical parameters, or even instances of the same
> #define'd interior. The only way to achieve this is to specify the
> interior in the parent CSG rather than the individual primitives.
>
> Thus, to get the desired results, you need to:
>
> - REMOVE any interior statements from the material.
> - ADD the interior statement to the union or merge.
> - For each part that needs a different ior (e.g. eyelashes or teeth) add
> an individual interior statement.
Thanks. It works now. I just added a material{interior{ior 1.3}} at the
end of the grouped skin meshes. Is union or merge better for SSLT? What
about translucency color? is there a range that gives better results for
human skin?
I used ior of 1 just to make sure that no other effects were giving me
the dark edges.
FlyerX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 26.03.2012 05:40, schrieb FlyerX:
> Thanks. It works now. I just added a material{interior{ior 1.3}} at the
> end of the grouped skin meshes. Is union or merge better for SSLT?
When using mesh2 objects, it shouldn't make any difference
> What
> about translucency color? is there a range that gives better results for
> human skin?
I'm currently using translucency <2.0,1.5,0.8>; if I got the math right,
that's somewhere in between the two measured "skin" data sets listed in
That Original SSLT Paper. I do like the effect, at least with the
high-quality DAZ texture I'm currently using.
Make sure to use the right mm_per_unit setting. I'm using 1000 mm per
unit, and scaling the PoseRay output by an empiric factor of 1.8/78.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/25/2012 11:24 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 26.03.2012 05:40, schrieb FlyerX:
>
>> Thanks. It works now. I just added a material{interior{ior 1.3}} at the
>> end of the grouped skin meshes. Is union or merge better for SSLT?
>
> When using mesh2 objects, it shouldn't make any difference
>
>> What
>> about translucency color? is there a range that gives better results for
>> human skin?
>
> I'm currently using translucency <2.0,1.5,0.8>; if I got the math right,
> that's somewhere in between the two measured "skin" data sets listed in
> That Original SSLT Paper. I do like the effect, at least with the
> high-quality DAZ texture I'm currently using.
>
> Make sure to use the right mm_per_unit setting. I'm using 1000 mm per
> unit, and scaling the PoseRay output by an empiric factor of 1.8/78.
Now with a texture, specular and a bump:
http://imgur.com/wkmWc
Seems to work well. I get some bright dots around the ear shadow. I am
using +am2 +a0.1 +r3.
clipka, I checked the paper you refer to and I still uncertain about the
translucency values. Is the value you are using the reduced scattering
vector in Fig. 5?
regards,
FlyerX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/25/2012 08:37 PM, clipka wrote:
> OK, here's the deal: To avoid SSLT seams between multiple objects, they
> currently must /share/ a common interior - it's not sufficient to have
> interiors with identical parameters, or even instances of the same
> #define'd interior. The only way to achieve this is to specify the
> interior in the parent CSG rather than the individual primitives.
>
> Thus, to get the desired results, you need to:
>
> - REMOVE any interior statements from the material.
> - ADD the interior statement to the union or merge.
> - For each part that needs a different ior (e.g. eyelashes or teeth) add
> an individual interior statement.
Seems to me the above might make an excellent addition to the
documentation ... whata ya think?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 26.03.2012 20:31, schrieb James Holsenback:
> On 03/25/2012 08:37 PM, clipka wrote:
>> OK, here's the deal: To avoid SSLT seams between multiple objects, they
>> currently must /share/ a common interior - it's not sufficient to have
>> interiors with identical parameters, or even instances of the same
>> #define'd interior. The only way to achieve this is to specify the
>> interior in the parent CSG rather than the individual primitives.
>>
>> Thus, to get the desired results, you need to:
>>
>> - REMOVE any interior statements from the material.
>> - ADD the interior statement to the union or merge.
>> - For each part that needs a different ior (e.g. eyelashes or teeth) add
>> an individual interior statement.
>
> Seems to me the above might make an excellent addition to the
> documentation ... whata ya think?
I expect to lift this limitation some time in the future, but yes -
until then it's probably a good idea to officially document this
restriction.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/26/2012 08:24 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 26.03.2012 20:31, schrieb James Holsenback:
>> On 03/25/2012 08:37 PM, clipka wrote:
>>> OK, here's the deal: To avoid SSLT seams between multiple objects, they
>>> currently must /share/ a common interior - it's not sufficient to have
>>> interiors with identical parameters, or even instances of the same
>>> #define'd interior. The only way to achieve this is to specify the
>>> interior in the parent CSG rather than the individual primitives.
>>>
>>> Thus, to get the desired results, you need to:
>>>
>>> - REMOVE any interior statements from the material.
>>> - ADD the interior statement to the union or merge.
>>> - For each part that needs a different ior (e.g. eyelashes or teeth) add
>>> an individual interior statement.
>>
>> Seems to me the above might make an excellent addition to the
>> documentation ... whata ya think?
>
> I expect to lift this limitation some time in the future, but yes -
> until then it's probably a good idea to officially document this
> restriction.
done:
http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference:Finish#Subsurface_Light_Transport
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
