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
I didn't realize gamma correction was such a controversial topic :) Anyways, it looks like from my last tests that the effects of either gamma setting can be approximated with the other one by adjusting exposure value/saturation/etc., so I'll just leave it on 2.2 and not worry about it.
Is it possible that some skin textures had extra (anti-)correction applied to them to make up for 3Delight's old behavior? I think there was mention on the Iray hair thread that opacity maps aren't working well for some hairs because of this.
Yes, please. That's gorgeous.
This old fellow doesn't look so bad for his age.
Ok, I just noticed my Genesis 2 Male figure can take Base Female and Victoria 6 UV maps.
Is there any way to get it to accept Victoria 5 maps?
nice result!
very interesting to see the settings
Is it possible that some skin textures had extra (anti-)correction applied to them to make up for 3Delight's old behavior? I think there was mention on the Iray hair thread that opacity maps aren't working well for some hairs because of this. yea, I think that got lost in there somewhere. What was the gamma set to in the surface tab for them maps, not just permanent adjustments when making the maps.
(need coffee, waking up)
(6ft 2in, 185lbs soaking wet, lol)
From the looks of this render, I think you have it figured out too Hope you have a chance to post the settings.
(need coffee, waking up)
It is of course possible that a map might be anti-corrected to make it gamma 1. However , I would doubt it if many were.
(6ft 2in, 185lbs soaking wet, lol)
I was more referring to the fact that its Michael 4, but... most of his textures, when rendered in a PBR, do tend to make him look OLD. The wrinkles, the crows feet... my god, you'd think the guy was in his 60's.
I shall keep my musings about your personal physique, or lack thereof as you are seeming to suggest, to myself. :)
Olympia HD
3Delight SSS can make people very tan.
To the poster who asked earlier, your G2M should already be able to use V5 UVs. He will pick up any UV that is in your G2F folders because their meshes have the same vertex order. I use old fantasy V4 skins on males all the time. ;)
You must have some pack I don't, Sickle, because... no, he can't.
If I apply Victoria 6, that works, and it opens up Vic 6 If I apply Bree from Genesis 2F, it unlocks 'base female.'
But if I apply, say, 'Tori for V5,' I get garble. I have yet to find anything that allows me to use Vic5 on G2M.
Try using this: UV Setter for Genesis 2 by Slosh. Should work for most G2F/G2M-usable UV sets.
The trick is that the UVs for the character the textures comes from need to be in the UV folder for the character you want to use -- so, for example, V5's UV set needs to be in the UV folder for G2M before G2M will know it's available. UVSetter gets somewhat around that by reading the source folder and applying the correct UV set when invoked.
(EDIT)
Or what vwrangler posted on the former page.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OH THANK YOU
Among other things, this now means I can use Skin Builder with G2M! WOOT. Thankyouthankyouthankyou
Try using this: UV Setter for Genesis 2 by Slosh. Should work for most G2F/G2M-usable UV sets.
The trick is that the UVs for the character the textures comes from need to be in the UV folder for the character you want to use -- so, for example, V5's UV set needs to be in the UV folder for G2M before G2M will know it's available. UVSetter gets somewhat around that by reading the source folder and applying the correct UV set when invoked.
Huh. There was an earlier version where he would just pick them up automatically. Didn't realize they'd changed it because I had my character presets already saved with the UVs applied, dangit. Sorry!
That's a 3Delight render, right? The fine details on the skin texture is what a lot of the Iray renders are missing. On mine I can sort of get the pores to show up, but they look more like flattened pancakes squished together than real pores, and there are no wrinkles at all.
That's a 3Delight render, right? The fine details on the skin texture is what a lot of the Iray renders are missing. On mine I can sort of get the pores to show up, but they look more like flattened pancakes squished together than real pores, and there are no wrinkles at all.
I'm willing to be corrected - some folks here are already way ahead of me on Iray settings ;) - but my experience is that it auto-converts skin bump to 1.00, and that's not high enough in Iray.
Also, for HD to work properly, subD needs to be set higher in Iray than in 3Delight, I think (because HD is from morphs, not textures).
EDIT: I've also gotten results I liked putting the bump in the top coat.
I really like the look of bump map stuff put into displacement in Iray, except I run into the problem that translucency and SSS look bad doing that. But if I'm not using those (like for a furry surface), it's very nice.
I've been generally happy with a bump of 1.2, maybe a little higher at distance (though it depends on the map, too).
For hair, good quality hair has a very nice look if you use bump magnitude of 2.
And, yeah, you are generally well-served by bumping up SubD on most stuff to 3. Even not particularly complex items might have weird shading otherwise.
Where is this mysterious IRay uber shader everyone talks about? All I see in my content directory is the standard IRay Optimized material and I cannot get it anywhere nearly what Slide3D and MBusch have gotten.
Look in your content library under shader presets or in smart content under materials.
I like to start with skin that looks very very dry and 'normal,' and then adjust top coat to reflect oiliness (or water, or greased up, or whatever)
Based on the information given in this thread I did my own attempt to build up a skin setup for the Iray render engine.
Instead of applying the "Iray Uber Base" I tried to refine the "Iray Optimized Genesis 2 Female MAT" for retaining Bump strength, Tranlucency and Transmitted Color settings already been defined by someone anonymus at DAZ's.
At first I moved the Specular Maps from "Glossy Color" to "Glossy Reflectivity" (like Khory suggested) and from "Top Coat Color" to "Top Coat Weight".
IMHO, placing them in "Glossy Reflectvity" instead of "Glossy Layered Weight" (or just simply removing them) smoothens the highlights more up and you get a less plastic-like-glossiness you'll get by just tuning the Weight/Reflectivity/Roughness channels without any spec map.
Just found recently out that this isn't quite correct. Could be dependent on the light, but the G2F spec map has some strange behaviour using bright lights.
I changed "Glossy Layered Weight" to 0.333333, "Glossy Reflectvity" to the default 0.50 (like suggested in the Iray Shader documentation) and "Refraction Index" to 1.45 (which would be, according to Wikipedia, an IOR value for the human epidermis.
After trying around a bit I finally left "Glossy Roughness" at 0.40, "Top Coat Weight" at 0.35 and "Top Coat Roughness" at 0.70 as already been defined.
Then I changed "Top Coat Layering Mode" to Fresnel and "Top Coat IOR" to 1.45 (in lack of a definitive value for the sweat/oils mix I guess just as good as anything else), applied the respective specular map to "Top Coat Bump".
At last I applied "Water - Thin” shader to "Cornea", "EyeReflection" and "Tear", changed the "Refraction Index" for the cornea to 1.38 and as 8eos8 suggests the "Eyes Cornea Bulge" morph to 1.0.
Grabbed some hair against baldness... and a nice swimsuit to prevent getting bashed. :-)
After working mostly with the build-in basic Sun-Sky light setup I did my final testrender with HDR Sky Cloudy (free)
from HDRI-Hub, at default Tone Mapping and rotated 180°.
So far I'm quite satisfied with the result.
A big "Thank You" to you all for sharing your experiences.
ADDENDUM 1.00A (28.04.2015):
When setting up skin or any other non-metal, one should better use the "PBR Specular/Glossiness" workflow than the "PBR Metal/Roughness".
As long as you have accurate real-world data available, it's much easier to work with, less hard guessing and also the more accurate your results are.
Yep, a little bit glossy, but I like it also. Very nice!
Thanks, MBusch. Now how, praytell, did you get that wonderfully soft not-quite airbrushed look? Because that is fantastic.
Hmmmm....I don't see much difference between the default bump value of 0.45 (1st render) and increasing it to 2 and adding the bump maps to top coat bump (2nd render). If I go up to 5 (3rd render) then I think I'm starting to see a little more detail, but it's pretty subtle. I also tried 10 but it looked pretty strange, like her head was made out of concrete.
Thanks, MBusch. Now how, praytell, did you get that wonderfully soft not-quite airbrushed look? Because that is fantastic.
Thank you, but I think the merit is from the texture artist. Maybe some settings help to get that look. I used just scatter in the Base Color Effect, but applied Scatter & Transmit in the Glossy Color Effect and Top Color Effect. I also raised a little bit the SSS values. The soft effect surprise me as well, as I raise the bump values and used a displacement map.
Here is the raw render. The postworked version is at http://www.daz3d.com/gallery/images/63221/
Hmmmm....I don't see much difference between the default bump value of 0.45 (1st render) and increasing it to 2 and adding the bump maps to top coat bump (2nd render). If I go up to 5 (3rd render) then I think I'm starting to see a little more detail, but it's pretty subtle. I also tried 10 but it looked pretty strange, like her head was made out of concrete.
With your figure lit from the front like that, its going to be hard to notice changes in the bump. bumps create shadows, if the light is coming head on there's nothing to cast shadow, if you move the light to the side it should be easier to notice the differences.