 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hello,
Windows 7-64bit, POV-Ray 3.7 64bit RC5
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.
Using a test model of a head about 7x11x9 inches, made up of several
sub-meshes (either union or merge), 25mm per unit, translucent color of
0.8, and ior of 1 (there was not much change with other values). I get
the following:
http://imgur.com/5mw16
The skin does not have any image maps, bump, specular, ambient or
reflection. There is one spherical area light and no radiosity. The dark
edge is alleviated somewhat as the translucent color is decreased but it
is always visible.
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. Does POV-Ray 3.7 work with a
union or merged mesh2 group and SSLT? The test model is open at the
bottom but I also tested this with a closed sphere with two materials
and it gave me the same dark edge between the materials.
Also the edges of the polygons are slightly visible on the forehead.
That was easily fixed by subdividing the mesh before rendering.
FlyerX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 25/03/2012 2:50 PM, 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 have but unfortunately I cannot find any examples. It does seem to be
dependent on the Poser models.
--
Regards
Stephen
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?)
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
