 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Working on a library of textures for Poser figures.
Here's DAZ's Stephanie 4 up close.
Most textures are more or less tweaked versions of what PoseRay
generates, except I'm using a homebrewn macro framework; eyes needed
more work; teeth use subsurface scattering.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'stephanie_pov_scene_2010-12-15_0234.png' (2017 KB)
Preview of image 'stephanie_pov_scene_2010-12-15_0234.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"clipka" <ano### [at] anonymous org> schreef in bericht
news:4d081fff@news.povray.org...
> Working on a library of textures for Poser figures.
>
> Here's DAZ's Stephanie 4 up close.
>
> Most textures are more or less tweaked versions of what PoseRay
> generates, except I'm using a homebrewn macro framework; eyes needed
> more work; teeth use subsurface scattering.
>
Looking very good indeed.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Here's DAZ's Stephanie 4 up close.
Why are the eyelashes bluish?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 15.12.2010 22:45, schrieb Cousin Ricky:
> clipka<ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>> Here's DAZ's Stephanie 4 up close.
>
> Why are the eyelashes bluish?
Because they still need more work?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12/14/2010 7:53 PM, clipka wrote:
> Working on a library of textures for Poser figures.
>
> Here's DAZ's Stephanie 4 up close.
>
> Most textures are more or less tweaked versions of what PoseRay
> generates, except I'm using a homebrewn macro framework; eyes needed
> more work; teeth use subsurface scattering.
Some tips that worked for me:
-no specular for any eye part. 10% reflection on eyesurface with a nice
room HDRI background.
-remove specular and bump from hair for faster renders. Also no specular
on the hair or it will look like a silk cover over the head.
-Lip: No specular and 5% reflection. Works best with a nice specular and
bump map.
-Skin: specular of about 0.078 and roughness about 0.025. No phong.
-Bilinear interpolation works best for most maps. Bicubic just does not
work well for transparencies.
-No ambient for the skin or eyes.
I have been trying to modify PoseRay to get a more consistent result
from Poser using the diffuse, specular and bump maps plus some some
pigment macros. Unfortunately Poser materials using the node system are
typically so badly implemented that many skin textures are just a mangle
of useless nodes. Sometimes Poser nodes are used as a hack to get better
rendering in a particular lighting making them useless for any other
scene. To the node problem you can also add bad maps with specular,
reflection and shadow effects baked in. I also think that lack of
direction from Smith Micro on how to properly define a basic skin
material using nodes is what creates this mess.
This makes it very difficult to translate a Poser material to POV-Ray
SDL. I am sure that each of the Poser nodes can be easily duplicated in
POV-Ray but many times I find that just using the basic components
(diffuse, specular, bump & transp) plus POV-Ray enhancements yield
better results.
The image I attached is Stephanie 4 with the Natasha elite maps. POV-Ray
3.7 windows beta 40 which works much better than 3.6 for image map
handling.
FlyerX
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'natasha_elite01b03_2010_12_16_02_10_30.jpg' (26 KB)
Preview of image 'natasha_elite01b03_2010_12_16_02_10_30.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 16.12.2010 10:32, schrieb FlyerX:
> Some tips that worked for me:
> -no specular for any eye part. 10% reflection on eyesurface with a nice
> room HDRI background.
> -remove specular and bump from hair for faster renders. Also no specular
> on the hair or it will look like a silk cover over the head.
> -Lip: No specular and 5% reflection. Works best with a nice specular and
> bump map.
> -Skin: specular of about 0.078 and roughness about 0.025. No phong.
> -Bilinear interpolation works best for most maps. Bicubic just does not
> work well for transparencies.
> -No ambient for the skin or eyes.
I'm using radiosity for these types of scenes, so ambient is a no-go for
me anyway ;-) (and is turned off automatically by POV-Ray 3.7)
As for specular, I intended to "sync" that with reflection intensity,
because physically they're the very same phenomenon. It's not trivial
though, as the proper relation between the "specular" parameter and the
"reflection" intensity depends on the roughness of the material. Also,
as I've learned recently, the specular highlights should follow the
fresnel formula, which they don't. And light sources with a looks_like
object are another problem, as they'd show up twice, once via the
"specular" and once via the "reflection" mechanism. Blurred reflections
would come in handy, too.
> I have been trying to modify PoseRay to get a more consistent result
> from Poser using the diffuse, specular and bump maps plus some some
> pigment macros. Unfortunately Poser materials using the node system are
> typically so badly implemented that many skin textures are just a mangle
> of useless nodes. Sometimes Poser nodes are used as a hack to get better
> rendering in a particular lighting making them useless for any other
> scene. To the node problem you can also add bad maps with specular,
> reflection and shadow effects baked in. I also think that lack of
> direction from Smith Micro on how to properly define a basic skin
> material using nodes is what creates this mess.
Yes, that's my experience, too. Ambient to simulate subsurface
scattering - yuck! I don't want glow-in-the-dark people in my renders...
> This makes it very difficult to translate a Poser material to POV-Ray
> SDL. I am sure that each of the Poser nodes can be easily duplicated in
> POV-Ray but many times I find that just using the basic components
> (diffuse, specular, bump & transp) plus POV-Ray enhancements yield
> better results.
That's why I'm aiming for a macro framework to define the materials in
POV-Ray: My hope is that I can just plug in the different
image/bump/specular/transparency maps, tweak a few constants, and get
better results than with the original materials in the original
software, with consistent quality in all lighting situations.
> The image I attached is Stephanie 4 with the Natasha elite maps. POV-Ray
> 3.7 windows beta 40 which works much better than 3.6 for image map
> handling.
... and I happen to know why ;-) You might want to add an option to
PoseRay though to automatically add "gamma 1.0" to specularity and
transparency maps, as I guess they're typically intended to be consumed
"raw" (wouldn't hurt for bump maps either, but isn't strictly necessary
there).
Nice render, btw. If it wasn't for the hair (which in my experience is
the most difficult part to get right), I'd call it convincing.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I think there is an interesting possibility here: to use settings like
explained by FlyerX for more general scenes where figures are not too close,
and and a method like Clipka's or Ive's for the really close ups where
details matter.
I already use a varying combination of both for most of my scenes where
figures are clearly visible. In particular, I always use a glass texture for
the eye transparency layer.
But, for sure, never use materials the way they come out of Poser! ;-)
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12/16/2010 4:16 AM, clipka wrote:
> ... and I happen to know why ;-) You might want to add an option to
> PoseRay though to automatically add "gamma 1.0" to specularity and
> transparency maps, as I guess they're typically intended to be consumed
> "raw" (wouldn't hurt for bump maps either, but isn't strictly necessary
> there).
>
The latest beta has gamma 1.0 for bump, transparency and finish maps
among a few other minor updates.
http://mysite.verizon.net/sfg0000/index.htm
FlyerX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 16.12.2010 11:16, clipka wrote:
> As for specular, I intended to "sync" that with reflection intensity,
> because physically they're the very same phenomenon. It's not trivial
> though, as the proper relation between the "specular" parameter and the
> "reflection" intensity depends on the roughness of the material. Also,
> as I've learned recently, the specular highlights should follow the
> fresnel formula, which they don't.
In fact from my experience the missing fresnel falloff for specular
highlights within POV-Ray is the most important issue that currently
prevents any generic solution for rendering realistic skins.
I've faked it by either using aoi (a pain to setup and no generic
solution) or blurred reflection (incredible long render times and
therefor of no *practical* use).
For short: it is currently not possible to do something as simple as a
classical Hollywood-Three-Point-Lighting portrait shot within POV-Ray
and getting any satisfying result :(
-Ive
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"FlyerX" <fly### [at] yahoocom> schreef in bericht
news:4d0b4617$1@news.povray.org...
> On 12/16/2010 4:16 AM, clipka wrote:
>
>> ... and I happen to know why ;-) You might want to add an option to
>> PoseRay though to automatically add "gamma 1.0" to specularity and
>> transparency maps, as I guess they're typically intended to be consumed
>> "raw" (wouldn't hurt for bump maps either, but isn't strictly necessary
>> there).
>>
>
> The latest beta has gamma 1.0 for bump, transparency and finish maps among
> a few other minor updates.
>
> http://mysite.verizon.net/sfg0000/index.htm
>
Excellent!
Something I just thought about is the possibility to add interior_texture
{...} to a material in the Materials window. This can be of use to simulate
(silk) lining in clothes for instance.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
