Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.Daz 3D is part of
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
There's no default bump value for AWE Surface. I think 150% is a carry over from the previous shader.
Can you provide a render with the firefly problems? Plus render settings like ie using the standard renderer or the render script, options changed from default? Thanks.
Ah yes, the Genesis 2 Female, since I decided to let DAZ install that base set after all, I think you may have set her base up with the AWE shaders so I just used those as a starting point for Genesis 8 Male to get a feel for doing it correctly. SO perhaps that's where the 150% came from.. can't remember off hand.
For the fireflies I may have misspoken there.. it's really only on the skin, not anywhere else so perhaps it's a scattering issue that I've not worked out as of yet....
Are there any DOF setting perameters you can offer me to try out as I'm going to implement those into my scene on one camera to see what's what with that sort of render. My settings are creating a very blurry mess that spans onto the character, not what I'm after! lol
Looks like I have a firefly or something render on it's way after all. Waiting for it to finish and then I'll post it.... Perhaps you can give me some clues as to what to try to resolve this... PS, I don't change the render settings or use the render script option. Last time I tried to use the render script for 3DL I got a black render so not sure what that was all about..
OK, here is the render....
Hmm, I don't think those are really fireflies, just general noise. So you're using the standard renderer with progressive? That will be quite slow compared to the scripted renderer, especially with global illumination enabled. Most of the noise problems does go away with higher pixel samples, but that can be very slow when rendering on the standard renderer.
If you're seeing black with the scripted renderer, there's something else going on. The shader files installed correctly or else you're just going to see a white material.
1. Sven has already suggested you use a high f-stop (1000+). Infinity focus, effectively.
To actually use DoF artistically:
2. https://www.daz3d.com/forums/viewthread/43636/ and https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/43694/ - didn't you download this set of scripts already? Perfect focal distance, once and for all. Regardless of renderer.
3. // see screenshot attached // Enable DoF, set the DoF plane colour in "scene view" to something actually visible, select the camera in the scene tab and look through perspective view to set the DoF visually. The tiny ball and the mid-plane is your focal plane; the box is your depth of field.
Never used Scripted Render and I see my mistake, there is a drop down with render options. Which one do you suggest I use. I'm using the general one and it's still coming out grainy and now the skin tone is on the pink side. Weird.
raytracer draft for quicker testst, raytracer final for ...well...final renders;)
OK, I tried the occlusion one and well that was slow as mud but the effect was pretty for as far as I let it go!! lol
Well have to say I prefer the non scripted 3DL rendering. It's actually giving me a more realistic render and the speed is really about the same. Unless you have some render settings I can input into the scripted render I'll stick with the regular one. I do need, however, need to know what settings will allow for more pixel samples so I can get the noise minimized.
Thank you
Both regular and scripted allow for adjusting pixel samples. As you can see in the render settings pane, the scriipted raytracer final preset defaults to 8 x 8 pixel samples, which is a good starting point. I use 10 x10 or 12 x12 for my final renders. Note that when you enable progressive rendering, the pixel filter is bypassed (actually reset to box filter 1 x 1, which is basically no filter. So progressive will give you a sharper render because there is no filter. With no filter (noise reduction) you will get more noticeable noise. The choice is yours;) Wowies default setting (gaussian 2 x 2) is very nice IMO. Experiment!
About noise in general: If you use let's say 8 x 8 pixel samples in combination with a higher number of Irradience smples like 512 or 1024, set independently for each surface in the surface pane,along with scripted non progressive rendering, with proper pixel filter settings, you will have no grain issues.
OK, with your suggestions I have the scripted render working but the skin looks very pale and desaturated. I may have to just lower the Gamma unless you have other suggestions. I'm still not sure if folks are going to be open to using scripted rendering. It would be nice if there were some regular 3DL render engine settings that the AWE folks could include in the update as a base to work off of. Funny how 3DL gives me dark grainy renders and the Scripted 3DL gives me light, desaturated renders!
Here is the final scripted render. See how light and desaturated the skin is? He's supposed to be tan! LOL
I wouldn't touch gamma settings in the render settings, that would affect everything else in unpredictable ways. But you can adjust gamma for the HDRI if you need to get more contrast, for example. You can also adjust temperature among other things.
The pale skin is simply a matter of adjusting SSS settings as I see it. Maybe you have set the SSS absorbation too high, or need to increase scattering, or adjust the various SSS colors to get more saturation, you need to look into that before starting to adjust the render output gamma setting IMHO.
Ah, I'd never understood the why of the noise in Progressive mode. Thanks.
If you get very different results with regular and scripted, I suspect you have not set gamma correction on and gamma to 2.2 in the regular renderer? Using this (linear workflow) is indeed crucial for getting accurate results;)
You're very welcome, credit goes to @Mustakettu85;)
As Sven noted, you may not have gamma correction enabled and gamma set to 2.2. I found when I did a clean reinstall of DS, the scripted renderer does not override those settings. To enable those two settings, switch back to standard 3delight renderer, then make the changes. If you previously make renders beforehand, textures loaded by DAZ Studio will be processed again with gamma correction. The presets are made with gamma correction enabled so they will look 'off' without gamma correction and gamma set to value other than 2.2.
Without gamma correction and gamma set to 1 (DAZ Studio default 3delight settings).
With gamma correction enabled and gamma set to 2.2
The render script simply exposes extra parameters to be passed to 3delight. The settings you're using in the standard renderer can also be applied/used in the scripted renderer setttings. Outside of the RaytracerDraft/Final, the other scripts comes with DAZ Studio. If I'm not mistaken, they will be Standard Example, Point Based Occlusion and Outline.
Box filter 1x1 is one part of the equation. The 3delight devs never did explain what the difference was with progressive (refinement). They just said it 'bypass' some calculations which resulted in more noise.
Yes, I've noticed raytraced reflections for example look different when enabling progressive, so it obviously uses a number of "cheats" to speed up rendering.
Just not understanding why in normal 3DL engine the skin looks darker, what I expect really but in the Scripted it looks like this. The gamma on the scripted hasnt' been touched.
Gamma is set to 2.2 for both types of 3DL renders.
Unfortunately, the vanilla render tab is too limited.
OK, literally worked most of the day to get this just right. Pretty happy. This is the 3Delight rendering engine with just the Gamma set to 2.20 so this is all from the Surfaces tab tweaks. Mostly trying to keep it as real as possible. I know it's not along the "scientific" way of getting from point A to point B as there are probably some would say I cheated but you know, there are allot of cheats out there but this isn't anything too ridiculous!
Unfortunately the JPEG format gets re-compressed by the forum software, and this makes the resulting file get so blurry it's hard to see any detail.
You may want to increase the diffuse roughness and/or rebalance diffuse and SSS at the lacrimals. They're way brighter than the skin in this render.
Good catch on the Eye Socket Lac material. Fixed...
Fixed... Actually added in the Normal maps (Unhid the still being worked on section but it's OK actually) Diffuse set a little lower to add a little more umph to the skin...
Hey that's great news about the normal maps, tks! And nice work!
Thanks so much but to be honest I'm not sure if the Normal map has any poz or neg values implemented into as of yet and def no control strength slider so honestly I don't see much of a difference with the maps in place or not. BUT it's nice for when Wowie and Co fully implement it I already have the maps in place and can fiddle later! :-)
Right! I'm thinking the same about displacement etc.
It's hidden for a reason.
I've written the code but lack the proper info/knowledge to troubleshoot issues I'm seeing in testing. I didn't want to take it out, so I just hid it by default. Use that feature at your own risk.
I need to redid the shadow catcher shader, mostly because I had screwed up the first one because it doesn't play nice with Shader Builder. But got sidetracked tinkering/bug fixing with AWE Surface. Toying with one crazy idea right now, though I really have no idea if it will work or not.