Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2025 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Actually, there's another option, won't cost you a dime, but involves having to learn to use aweSurface and scripted pathtracing;) So you might or might not want to look into this. You need to install the shader, the scripts to call the pathtracer and possibly a few other things. Or you can buy the awe Shading kit and install everything via DIM, if you prefer that.
Link to the free stuff: https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/277581/awe-surface-shader-a-new-physically-plausible-shader-for-daz-studio-and-3delight/p1
and to the commercial package: https://www.daz3d.com/aweshading-kit-10-for-daz-studio
:( Neither of the links are working for me
Should work now...
Yes thanks
Of course I don't mind. I agree with your critique; I believe "saturation" is the term you're looking for. My point was not that it blended together, but that I spent literally no time lighting the scene at all, and I'm sure it'll be easier to even out than properly lighting the scene by placing different types of lights. Now, I'll probably just do the classic 3-light approach, which is kind of what Oso3D was suggesting, but it'll be to manage the viewers' attention rather than to fundamentally light the scene.
A possible solution to the problem you point out that I'll try later today is to use a three-wall approach to the scene and just use the HDRI for its light from behind the camera, and not necessarily the background image.
But look at just the model. I think the HDRI does a very nice job of distributing the light so that it looks natural, with no hot spots, or undue shadows that I just *know* I would have gotten if I had lit the scene "manually". And the lighting remains consistent when the model moves around the scene, another problem solved.
Thanks for your constructive comments... that's how I get better at this.
These days I light scenes almost exclusively with HDRIs (sometimes adding headlamp to add some frontal fill light). Iray Section Plane Nodes are great for letting the HDRI light into interiors: https://www.deviantart.com/slimmckenzie/journal/Tutorial-Iray-Section-Plane-Node-beginner-661286658
Wow, this really illustrates how important lighting is and how lighting alone can very drastically change the way textures look.
I forgot about section planes. Coincidentally I just downloaded a photogrammetry scanned room with 4 walls and was wondering how i was going to remove one without geometry editor.
I love HDRI and use them all the time. I've got more than ya can shake a stick at, but there are a few I use a lot ;).
Laurie
To fix the dulled out background problem you could render once WITH just the dome on, no figure. Then render again with the dome OFF and shadows on and then composite in Photoshop or GIMP. Then you can control the contrast or intensity of the background to marry it up better.
I use HDRIs almost exclusively for outdoor scenes. It's pretty much the only way to get a realistic sky, in my experience. I've got a couple of non-HDRI skydomes, but I've never gotten the hang of them. Usually I put actual 3D models in the scene to create the foreground, but HDRIs make good backdrops with no holes. (And there's almost nothing more infuriating than discovering that a render that came out amazing has a transparent bit you somehow didn't notice until it was done...)
...I primarily use studio lighting and sky only HDRIs as opposed to scenery based ones. Two which I use regularly are Denki Gakas IBL Skies (the full bundle) and Valzheimer's Fast Production Lights for Iray. I also use Dimension Theory's Skies of Economy which has HDR lighting..
Thanks for the link! I tried Agent Unawares's HDRI:
Yes you can use them with the Uberenvironment skydome which comes with DS.
I tend to just render the once with Dome off and then render the background separately and add in post
Yep Scorpio, that's basically what I would do, but Only if I needed to specifically use the HDRI scene as the background. If I'm using a photo or something else, then just the one render without the dome works. Everything I do goes through Photoshop anyway. Going without would be like going out without shoes....or makeup...or without my keys - Doesn't compute..LOL.
What about HDRIs created in the other 3D programs?
Could they also be used for providing the light to the scene, besides the background?
Does Bryce make HDRIs with sufficient range to provide lighting?
Well, obviously, we didn't know you didn't know.
... And if you'd known you didn't know you could have asked us about them.
As far as I can remember they will do up to 96 bit images. I have a few I did in Bryce for fantasy skies.
Well the trick is whether the light is -effective- as lighting. I’ve seen many programs create hdri where the light is flat.
But I own Bryce so I should shut up and try it myself. :)
You can save a scene or a sky in Bryce as HDRI (RGBE RLE2 as Carrara, DS Iray/3DL use) but the data is derived from a 48 bit render. The next issue is you cannot directly render a spherical panorama, only a cylindrical one. We have a product to bolt a lens in front of the camera that renders directly a spherical panorama. But Bryce limits to 4000 pixels wide so the pano can only be 4000 x 2000 pixels. You can, of course, render the 6 cube faces and assemble the pano in an external program. I made (faked) many HDRIs from Bryce renders with a dynamic range of up to several million to one.
Making HDRIs from photographs usually yield better results; meanwhile, I made around 300 indoor and outdoor ones. Though it's nice to have a high dynamic range, particularly if the sun is in the scene, the HDRI often doesn't provide enough ambient light. A lower dynamic range gives nice ambient light but an additional key light may be necessary.
The size of an HDRI usually doesn't matter much as far as light generation is concerned but size is key if it is used to render as backdrop. You need at least 1 pixel in the HDRI for 1 pixel in the rendered scene. If your HDRI width is 3600 pixels and you use a 28 mm lens, the horizontal field of view is about 60 degrees, a sixth of the HDRI is visible, which means 600 pixels. And that's the maximum width you can render your scene with a sharp backdrop.
Or that :)
Had I known that you didn't know that I didn't know, I would have known to let you know :)
I think the only thing that Donald Rumsfeld ever said where I could actually follow his logic was his comment about unknown unknowns, and strangely, the time when he was making the most sense is what his detractors used to discredit him.
Just in case, hopefully people know how to turn off the headlamp before rendering; it is for posing and, unfortuntately, is a very unsubtle light which screws with the diffuse light from the HDRI.
Thanks a lot, GlenWebb and Horo.
That gives me something to experiment further.
I find headlamp quite adequate for many renders. Most of my renders have the headlamp on at various strengths. It depends on what you're shooting for with your renders. Most of the time I'm after a photograph type of look, and I think headlamp helps achieve that look. I could set up a similar frontal light and use that, but prefer to use the headlamp as it's easier and moves with the camera. There really is no "right or wrong" way to do 3D renders, imo - as long as you're getting the look you're after everything's fair game to use. Like most art, it's subject to personal tastes and preferences. :) It's always fun to experiment with different things and different settings and see what you, personally, like. In the end it's all ones and zeros and whatever you want to do to get the render to look the way that you like it, it's all good. :)
Snip... I'm done for now!
*Snip* I'm done!