Why has DS always got 3Delight-Specular-Glossiness so badly wrong when importing a Poser pr...

3dcheapskate3dcheapskate Posts: 2,089

N.B. This question is of mainly historical interest... ;o)

Why has DS always got '3Delight > Specular > Glossiness' so badly wrong when importing a Poser prop/figure ? This has been a minor PITA ever since DS2/3 days. Ages ago I did some empirical wet thumb in the wind approximations and came up with this...

...which I used to create DS mats for anything I produced.

 

Of course with the focus on iRay (Iray ? Is it de rigeur to get the capitalization correct?) I realize that this is just pissing in the wind... ;o)

...but I find myself wondering nevertheless. Mainly because I'm just doing a new Poser prop and I recall what 'fun' (spelt ''irritation') it was creating 3Delight-specific materials...

P6vDS3Specularity.png
1009 x 521 - 98K
Post edited by 3dcheapskate on

Comments

  • PaintboxPaintbox Posts: 494

    If it is always the same result, perhaps a DAZ scripter could make a script that applies your findings to the materials. Just a thought. I don't know 3Delight that well, but 3D importing/exporting has always been a PITA to be honest. Programs not fully compliant, or not being able to read certain versions, or some archaic utility you need to use before you can use it. In that regard DAZ Studio isn't doing so bad.

  • macleanmaclean Posts: 2,173

    It's dependent on a material's 'NsExponent'. Setting the NsExponent in the material before importing it will give you the correct Spec Glossiness.

    I can't find the notes I made with the full range of equivalents, but after checking a couple of files, it looks like NsExponent 60 = Glossiness 70%; NsExponent 40 = Glossiness 80%; NsExponent 5 = Glossiness 100%

  • 3dcheapskate3dcheapskate Posts: 2,089
    edited October 2018

     

    Paintbox said:

    If it is always the same result, perhaps a DAZ scripter could make a script that applies your findings to the materials. Just a thought. I don't know 3Delight that well, but 3D importing/exporting has always been a PITA to be honest. Programs not fully compliant, or not being able to read certain versions, or some archaic utility you need to use before you can use it. In that regard DAZ Studio isn't doing so bad.

    The difference here is that when the original DAZ Studio was created it specifically used Poser files. DS didn't have its own DS-native file format (except for .daz scene files and the .dsa, etc scripts - not sure when they came in, DS1, 2, or 3?)

    I guess it was just a mistake that was made in the original code, and it never got to the top of the 'fix-it' queue ?

    Post edited by 3dcheapskate on
  • 3dcheapskate3dcheapskate Posts: 2,089
    edited October 2018
    maclean said:

    It's dependent on a material's 'NsExponent'. Setting the NsExponent in the material before importing it will give you the correct Spec Glossiness.

    I can't find the notes I made with the full range of equivalents, but after checking a couple of files, it looks like NsExponent 60 = Glossiness 70%; NsExponent 40 = Glossiness 80%; NsExponent 5 = Glossiness 100%

    That's defined in an OBJ isn't it ? At least NsExponent rings a bell for OBJs I've exported from Blender. And I know that I always have to fiddle with the Specular/Highlught settings after importing an OBJ from Blender into Poser. But then again, I never bother with Blender material settings, so my NsExponent settings are probably crap to start with !

    Maybe that's a case of CICO ?  ;o)

    Post edited by 3dcheapskate on
  • 3dcheapskate3dcheapskate Posts: 2,089
    edited October 2018

    Just checked - it's 'Ns' in the OBJ and 'NsExponent' in the PP2. My process The way I usually hack things is (1) create mesh in Blender not bothering about materials, (2) export as OBJ, (3) import OBJ into Poser, (4) set Poser materials, (5) save as PP2, (6) load PP2 in DAZ Studio.

    OBJ file - Ns is whatever default value Blender assigned:

    PP2 - NsExponent should be set in accordance with whichever PoserSurface parameter it's related to (Highlight_Size?), and I've set all those up to get 'something that sort-of looks right-ish' in Poser:

    Edit: by the way, Poser 'Highlight_Size' for this prop is 0.05

     

    OBJmat.png
    313 x 278 - 7K
    mat.png
    488 x 453 - 14K
    Post edited by 3dcheapskate on
  • I decided to go back to basics - I exported a simple sphere OBJ with a simple MTL from Blender, imported that into Poser (PP2014) and DAZ Studio (a 4.9 beta, the latest I have) using a very basic scene (groundplane plus one infinite light). 
    Doing so rang (or rather clunked) looks of rusty bells...

    I also looked at various explanations of the Wavefront OBJ and MTL files as the OBJs had a 'Ke' that I didn't recall (apparently that's for light emitting materials) and other stuff that I thought I knew what it was but was worth a double-check.

    My plan was to simply try comparing Poser/DS renders with one variable changing in the OBJ, Ns=0, 10, 20, ... 90, 100 ... but you know what they say about plans.

  • macleanmaclean Posts: 2,173

    Here's what Rob Whisenant told me many years ago when I was asking about .mtl files.

    Here is what the mtl statements mean to D|S... both import & export. Whether the information carries over to another application is up to that application and whether it supports a given statement (and/or how).

    d = Dissolve (aka Opacity/Transparency)(some may read 'Tr' instead - D|S reads both)
    Ns = Shininess (aka Glossiness - Focus of Specular Highlight)
    Ni = Optical Density (aka Index of Refraction)
    Ka = Ambient Color
    Kd = Diffuse Color
    Ks = Specular Color
    Km = Bump Strength (some may read 'bump' instead)

    map_Ka = Ambient Color Map Path
    map_Kd = Diffuse Color Map Path
    map_Ks = Specular color Map Path
    map_D = Dissolve Map Path (some may read 'map_d' instead)
    map_Bump = Bump Map Path (some may read 'map_bump' or 'map_Km' instead)
    map_refl = Environment Map Path (some may read 'refl' instead)

    D|S supports both relative and absolute paths for maps. Paths which contain spaces should be enclosed by quotes. Typically, importers expect the map to be in the same directory as the obj and mtl (or at a path specified by an environment variable)... D|S doesn't care as long as the path is correct.

    "illum" is not supported by D|S. This statement describes the illumination model for a given surface. 0 = Kd, 1 = Ka Kd, 2 = Ka Kd Ks Ns

    I imagine Ke stands for Emissive.

  • 3dcheapskate3dcheapskate Posts: 2,089
    edited November 2018

    Thanks, that's useful to know, especially the "..."illum" is not supported by D|S..." . That saves me from chasing red herrings - I'd started wondering whrether that was related to DS 'Lighting Model' (Plastic, Metallic, Glossy Plastic, etc)...

    Anyway, here's the MTL for my simple test object, as exported from Blender:

    # Blender MTL File: 'BallTest.blend'
    # Material Count: 1
    newmtl Ball
    Ns 96.078431
    Ka 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000
    Kd 0.800000 0.800000 0.800000
    Ks 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000
    Ke 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
    Ni 1.000000
    d 1.000000
    illum 2

    The best link I found on the MTL file format was http://paulbourke.net/dataformats/mtl/ which seems to be an extract from the specification. From this:
    Ns <exponent>: Specifies the specular exponent for the current material.  This defines the focus of the specular highlight. "exponent" is the value for the specular exponent.  A high exponent results in a tight, concentrated highlight.  Ns values normally range from 0 to 1000.
    Ni <optical_density>: Specifies the optical density for the surface. This is also known as index of refraction. "optical_density" is the value for the optical density.  The values can range from 0.001 to 10.  A value of 1.0 means that light does not bend as it passes through an object.  Increasing the optical_density increases the amount of bending.  Glass has an index of refraction of about 1.5.  Values of less than 1.0 produce bizarre results and are not recommended.​
    d <factor>: Specifies the dissolve for the current material. "factor" is the amount this material dissolves into the background.  A  factor of 1.0 is fully opaque.  This is the default when a new material is created.  A factor of 0.0 is fully dissolved (completely transparent). Unlike a real transparent material, the dissolve does not depend upon material thickness nor does it have any spectral character.  Dissolve works on all illumination models.

    So with Ni=1, d=1, Ke= 0 0 0, and DAZ Studio ignoring 'illum' that leaves me with Ns, Ka, Kd and Ks.
    Since I don't want any ambient either I should probably have Ka=0 0 0 as well, leaving just three relevant parameters in the OBJ - Ns, Kd, and Ks.
    So I'm going to try using this as the MTL file:

    # Blender MTL File: 'BallTest.blend'
    # Material Count: 1
    newmtl Ball
    Ns 90
    Ka 0 0 0
    Kd 1 1 1
    Ks 1 1 1

     

    Post edited by 3dcheapskate on
  • macleanmaclean Posts: 2,173

    Looking through my old .pp2 templates, from what I can see, here are some Ns values and DS equivalents

    NsExponent 1 = Glossiness 100%

    NsExponent 60 = Glossiness 70%

    NsExponent 40 = Glossiness 80%

  • I've just tried some tests imported my OBJ into both Poser and DS. First, here are the PP2014 results for Ns=10, 50, and 90

    Ns appears to be used just to set Poser's Highlight_Size (0.1, 0.02, and 0.011111 respectively)

    PP2014-Ns10.jpg
    632 x 583 - 65K
    PP2014-Ns50.jpg
    623 x 575 - 64K
    PP2014-Ns90.jpg
    627 x 612 - 66K
  • Next the DS results for Ns=10, 50, and 90 (DS4.9.4.117beta - the latest version I have)

    Surely I'm doing something really stupid here, because DS seems to be totally ignoring Ns and setting Glossiness=100%

    DS49-Ns=10.jpg
    1203 x 610 - 93K
    DS49-Ns=50.jpg
    714 x 507 - 55K
    DS49-Ns=90.jpg
    700 x 492 - 51K
  • 3dcheapskate3dcheapskate Posts: 2,089
    edited November 2018

    Maybe it's something to do with my hand-edited MTL file, so I re-exported from Blender with two different Kd values just to be sure I was using the correct MTL and set different Ns values.

    Same problem - Glossiness set to 100% in both cases. 

    DS49-Ns=10-RETEST.jpg
    698 x 531 - 75K
    DS49-Ns=1000-RETEST.jpg
    689 x 526 - 71K
    Post edited by 3dcheapskate on
  • 3dcheapskate3dcheapskate Posts: 2,089
    edited November 2018

    And it's the same with DS3 (3.1.2.32advanced). No screenshots, but I can do some if anybody really wants to see them.

    So much for using an OBJ to set the baseline. I guess that my next step is to save my Balltest props with the different Highlight_Size settings as Poser props, check that the Ns values in them match those of the original OBJs, and see what the Surfaces show me when I import them into DAZ Studio.

    They should match up with maclean's figures.

    Post edited by 3dcheapskate on
  • 3dcheapskate3dcheapskate Posts: 2,089
    edited November 2018
    1. Poser seems to save the correct Ns value into the PP2 (first image)
    2. DS4.9 sets Glossiness values dependent on the Ns value from the PP2 (and the values dovetail into maclean's values)
      • Balltest10 (Ns=10.0) ... Glossiness=95%
      • Balltest50 (Ns=50.0)  ... Glossiness=75%
      • Balltest90 (Ns=90.0)  ... Glossiness=55%
    3. The DS renders ??? Something's not right there...

    From the MTL spec quoted above - "Ns <exponent>: Specifies the specular exponent for the current material.  This defines the focus of the specular highlight. "exponent" is the value for the specular exponent.  A high exponent results in a tight, concentrated highlight.  Ns values normally range from 0 to 1000." 

    But it looks to me as if the DS highlight is getting less focussed as Ns increases (i.e. [edited] Glossiness is decreasing instead of increasing) - which would be totally the wrong way round.

    I must be doing something stupid, overlooking something, or misinterpreting something, yes ?

    NsInPP2.jpg
    1040 x 267 - 72K
    Ns=10,Glossiness=95%.jpg
    414 x 548 - 43K
    Ns=50,Glossiness=75%.jpg
    414 x 548 - 52K
    Ns=90,Glossiness=55%.jpg
    414 x 548 - 53K
    Post edited by 3dcheapskate on
  • 3dcheapskate3dcheapskate Posts: 2,089
    edited November 2018

    Referring back to (1) my graph in the OP, and (2) the three values for Poser's conversion between Ns and Highlight_Size:

    Ns     Highlight_Size     DS Glossiness     My graph Glossiness
    10     0.1                95%               around 70-75%            
    50     0.02               75%               slightly less than 90-95%
    90     0.011111           55%               around 90-95%.     .

    So my empirically derived graph also seems to indicate that the Ns-Glossiness relationship [editthat DS uses when importing a Poser file is the wrong way round...

    Post edited by 3dcheapskate on
  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 56,455
    edited November 2018

    The graph looks right to me - Glossier surfaces have smaller highlights, duller surfaces have larger, more diffuse highlights (which are almost always weaker - lower Specular Strength).

    Post edited by Richard Haseltine on
  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 4,486
    edited November 2018

    I use a lot of Poser content with 3DL in DS. Can't comment on the math, not a Poser user, but since I tweak every setting anyway this has not been a big problem, but sometimes irritating for sure;) Yeah 100% glossiness basically means infinite small specular highlights with the DS default shader. I'm used to setting glossiness to 60%, spec color to mid gray and killing the ambience as a starting point:) I think it's important to get used to avoiding pure white and pure black colors for all the color slots, in combination with using a linear workflow ie setting gamma correction on and gamma value to 2.2 in the render settings. FWIW:)

    Post edited by Sven Dullah on
  • 3dcheapskate3dcheapskate Posts: 2,089
    edited November 2018

    Now I'm even more puzzled ! I created 7 different Balltest OBJ's (OBJ and MTL files in the attached ZIP, just in case anybody wants to double-check what I've done)  the only differences being the Ns and Kd values (the Kd purely as a visual cue to which Ns setting the OBJ has:

       Ns       Kd
       0.00   White
       0.01   Magenta
       0.1    Yellow
       1.00   Cyan
      10.00   Blue
     100.00   Green
    1000.00   Red

    I imported them all into back into Blender and rendered. This is my baseline. And it seems to match the spec (see earlier post), so it's a good indication of how the specular highlight should look.

     

    I then imported the seven OBJs into PP2014 and rendered. The red, green and blue ones seem more-or-less okay but the others are whiteouts. As Richard said, the Specular Strength should be decreasing as the specular becomes less focussed.

     

    Since DS seems to ignore Ns when importing an OBJ (see earlier post), and because the problem I'm really interested in is DS importing Poser files, I saved the Poser scene, imported that into DS4.9beta, and rendered. 

     

    I think I need to go and double-check that the NsExponent and specular strength (the fourth value in the Kd # # # # statement in the PP2/PZ3, as in the earlier example) are as I expect. And also note the DS Glossiness and Specular strength values.

     

    zip
    zip
    Balltest0-1000.zip
    36K
    BlenderRender.jpg
    537 x 277 - 13K
    PP2014-Balltest0-1000.jpg
    382 x 382 - 5K
    DS4.9-Balltest0-1000.jpg
    414 x 548 - 35K
    Post edited by 3dcheapskate on
  • 3dcheapskate3dcheapskate Posts: 2,089
    edited November 2018

    Here are the actual values read from the files, or read from the Poser/DS UIs:

    Ns in OBJ Kd in OBJ  Poser Highlight_Size     NsExponent in PZ3     DS4.9 Glossiness
       0.00   White           100.0                   0.00                100.0        
       0.01   Magenta         100.0                   0.01                100.0
       0.1    Yellow           10.0                   0.10                 99.95
       1.00   Cyan              1.0                   1.00                 99.5
      10.00   Blue              0.1                  10.00                 95.0
     100.00   Green             0.01                100.00                 50.0
    1000.00   Red               0.007813            128.00                 50.0

    (Note: the value highlighted in blue appears to be due to limiting in Poser)

    That bit from the spec regarding Ns again - "...A high exponent results in a tight, concentrated highlight..."

    So the red and green balls (NsExponent values of 128 and 100 respectively in the PZ3, DS 'Glossiness' of 50%) should have the tightest, most concentrated highlights, while the white and magenta balls (NsExponent of 0.00 and 0.01 0 respectively in the PZ3, DS 'Glossiness' of 100%) should have the least focussed highlights.

    To me the highlights on the red and green balls in the DS render do actually look more focussed than the other balls (although nowhere near as focussed as I'd expect from the Blender render). That's why I'm puzzled again.

    Post edited by 3dcheapskate on
  • 3dcheapskate3dcheapskate Posts: 2,089
    edited November 2018

    For a laugh I tried halving the specular strength for each ball (red=1.0, green=0.5, blue=0.25, etc) in Poser and saving that to a new PZ3. Here's that one rendered in both PP2014 and DS4.9


     

    PP2014-HalvingSpecStr.jpg
    382 x 382 - 5K
    DS4.9-HalvingSpecStr.jpg
    414 x 548 - 36K
    Post edited by 3dcheapskate on
  • 3dcheapskate3dcheapskate Posts: 2,089
    edited November 2018

    ...and I also tried reversing the order of the balls in DS4.9:

    DS4.9-HalvingSpecStr+FlippingPosns.jpg
    414 x 548 - 36K
    Post edited by 3dcheapskate on
  • 3dcheapskate3dcheapskate Posts: 2,089
    edited November 2018

    Simply importing the first PZ3 with the seven balls (ti.e. the one mentioned in this post) into DS4.9 and changing the Diffuse Colour to mid-grey. The two on the left look near enough identical (no surprise with NsExponents of 128 and 100), the next (NsExponent=10) seems to have a pinpoint highlight, and all the rest seem to be unfocussed in exactly the same way.

     

    ...and orbiting the camra about 90 degrees:

    MidGrey.jpg
    414 x 548 - 33K
    MidGreyRotated.jpg
    414 x 548 - 33K
    Post edited by 3dcheapskate on
  • 3dcheapskate3dcheapskate Posts: 2,089
    edited November 2018

    Of course, it's not until I try different 'Lighting Model' settings that I remember that DS has converted the IBL of my Poser PZ3 to a distant light, so I have 2 distant lights, same azimuth but 0 and +45 degrees elevation, which blurs things a bit more, especially with the non-glossy palastic/metallic lighting models

    Now I remember why I used the Glossy Plastic and Glossy Metallic lighting models for the graph in the OP...

    (Note: you'll have to click the thumbnails to view the rest of the lighting models - they have the lighting model in the name)

    Plastic 

     

    Glossy Plastic

    5x5Balls,GlossyPlastic.jpg
    500 x 300 - 53K
    5x5Balls,Metallic.jpg
    500 x 300 - 52K
    5x5Balls,GlossyMetallic.jpg
    500 x 300 - 53K
    5x5Balls,Skin.jpg
    500 x 300 - 56K
    5x5Balls,Matte.jpg
    500 x 300 - 17K
    5x5Balls,Plastic.jpg
    500 x 300 - 18K
    Post edited by 3dcheapskate on
  • I always thought that DS 3Delight 'Glossiness' seemed to be the wrong way round.. I'd expect Glossiness=100% to be a shiny, polished type surface (which would correspond to a high NsExponent value, and give a tight,concentrated highlight). And I'd expect Glossiness=0% to be a dull, matte type surface (which would correspond to a low NsExponent value, and give a wide, unfocussed highlight - probably no highlight at all).

    But looking at the 5x5 grey balls tests in the previous posts it appears that the tightest,most concentrated highlight occurs around Glossiness=50

    I really can't make head or tail of this...

  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 4,486
    edited November 2018

    I always thought that DS 3Delight 'Glossiness' seemed to be the wrong way round.. I'd expect Glossiness=100% to be a shiny, polished type surface (which would correspond to a high NsExponent value, and give a tight,concentrated highlight). And I'd expect Glossiness=0% to be a dull, matte type surface (which would correspond to a low NsExponent value, and give a wide, unfocussed highlight - probably no highlight at all).

    But looking at the 5x5 grey balls tests in the previous posts it appears that the tightest,most concentrated highlight occurs around Glossiness=50

    I really can't make head or tail of this...

    Just keep in mind that you are talking about one shader (DS default), which is far from physically accurate or even plausible;) Use your eyes, not math, that's my 2cents. But as I mentioned and you know, glossiness of 100 means an infinite small, therefore almost invisible highlight. One shouldn't really separate specular highlights from raytraced reflections, right?

    Post edited by Sven Dullah on
  • Just keep in mind that you are talking about one shader (DS default), which is far from physically accurate or even plausible;) Use your eyes, not math, that's my 2cents. But as I mentioned and you know, glossiness of 100 means an infinite small, therefore almost invisible highlight. One shouldn't really separate specular highlights from raytraced reflections, right?

    The DS Default shader is the only one I ever really used, and it always seemed 'plausible' enough for me back in those days. But I guess that in these PBR days 'plausible' ain't what it used to be ! laugh

     

  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 4,486

    Just keep in mind that you are talking about one shader (DS default), which is far from physically accurate or even plausible;) Use your eyes, not math, that's my 2cents. But as I mentioned and you know, glossiness of 100 means an infinite small, therefore almost invisible highlight. One shouldn't really separate specular highlights from raytraced reflections, right?

    The DS Default shader is the only one I ever really used, and it always seemed 'plausible' enough for me back in those days. But I guess that in these PBR days 'plausible' ain't what it used to be ! laugh

    Lol I've noticed that also;) DS default is pretty robust, you know what you get.

     

Sign In or Register to comment.