Fiddling with Iray skin settings...

13468990

Comments

  • 8eos88eos8 Posts: 166
    edited December 1969

    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.

    DS used to use gamma 1. Then we gained the ability to set the render gamma, but not to set the input gamma for textures in the standard shaders (so that in effect most colour maps, which had an effective gamma of 2.2, were double corrected). Finally we have both the ability to set render gamma and to set the input gamma for maps - in 3delight turning gamma correction on enables that, as far as I am aware the gamma value of a map is always used in Iray. Gamma sets the mapping used on creating the rendered image, for 3Delight gamma correction on tells the renderer to anti-correct any maps marked as other than gamma 1.

    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.

  • evilded777evilded777 Posts: 2,243
    edited December 1969

    Kamion99 said:
    So, I think I've figured out my Iray hair settings. I'm off to eat now, but if anyone wants I'll post my settings when I get the chance.

    Yes, please. That's gorgeous.

  • evilded777evilded777 Posts: 2,243
    edited December 1969

    This old fellow doesn't look so bad for his age.

    Sol2.png
    494 x 800 - 478K
    Sol.png
    494 x 800 - 417K
  • Oso3DOso3D Posts: 13,392
    edited December 1969

    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?

  • Slide3DSlide3D Posts: 190
    edited December 1969

    Kamion99 said:
    So, I think I've figured out my Iray hair settings. I'm off to eat now, but if anyone wants I'll post my settings when I get the chance.

    nice result!
    very interesting to see the settings
  • ZarconDeeGrissomZarconDeeGrissom Posts: 5,293
    edited March 2015

    8eos8 said:
    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.
    same. (EDIT) And it makes this much difference in 3delight, lol
    http://www.daz3d.com/forums/viewreply/793798/
    NONE!

    DS used to use gamma 1. Then we gained the ability to set the render gamma, but not to set the input gamma for textures in the standard shaders (so that in effect most colour maps, which had an effective gamma of 2.2, were double corrected). Finally we have both the ability to set render gamma and to set the input gamma for maps - in 3delight turning gamma correction on enables that, as far as I am aware the gamma value of a map is always used in Iray. Gamma sets the mapping used on creating the rendered image, for 3Delight gamma correction on tells the renderer to anti-correct any maps marked as other than gamma 1.

    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)

    Post edited by ZarconDeeGrissom on
  • ZarconDeeGrissomZarconDeeGrissom Posts: 5,293
    edited March 2015

    This old fellow doesn't look so bad for his age.
    NICE! I'm envious, Why can't I have a build like that, lol.
    (6ft 2in, 185lbs soaking wet, lol)
    Post edited by ZarconDeeGrissom on
  • Jack238Jack238 Posts: 112
    edited December 1969

    Kamion99 said:
    So, I think I've figured out my Iray hair settings. I'm off to eat now, but if anyone wants I'll post my settings when I get the chance.

    From the looks of this render, I think you have it figured out too Hope you have a chance to post the settings.

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 53,669
    edited December 1969

    8eos8 said:
    DS used to use gamma 1. Then we gained the ability to set the render gamma, but not to set the input gamma for textures in the standard shaders (so that in effect most colour maps, which had an effective gamma of 2.2, were double corrected). Finally we have both the ability to set render gamma and to set the input gamma for maps - in 3delight turning gamma correction on enables that, as far as I am aware the gamma value of a map is always used in Iray. Gamma sets the mapping used on creating the rendered image, for 3Delight gamma correction on tells the renderer to anti-correct any maps marked as other than gamma 1.

    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)

    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.

  • evilded777evilded777 Posts: 2,243
    edited December 1969

    This old fellow doesn't look so bad for his age.
    NICE! I'm envious, Why can't I have a build like that, lol.
    (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. :)

  • Slide3DSlide3D Posts: 190
    edited December 1969

    Olympia HD

    OLYMPIA.jpg
    1000 x 1300 - 484K
  • ZarconDeeGrissomZarconDeeGrissom Posts: 5,293
    edited December 1969

    Slide3D said:
    Olympia HD
    is that? Pleas don't take this the wrong way, I thought she was much darker toned then that.
    pop-up06_olympia6_.jpg
    1000 x 1300 - 134K
  • SickleYieldSickleYield Posts: 7,318
    edited December 1969

    Slide3D said:
    Olympia HD
    is that? Pleas don't take this the wrong way, I thought she was much darker toned then that.

    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. ;)

  • Oso3DOso3D Posts: 13,392
    edited December 1969

    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.

  • vwranglervwrangler Posts: 3,422
    edited December 1969

    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.

  • ZarconDeeGrissomZarconDeeGrissom Posts: 5,293
    edited March 2015

    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.

    just thinking out-loud. UV mapping in the surface tab, I was fussing with that a bit this morning making 'AltMats' for some horrid face-plant figures. Applying a mat, set's it's UV mapping, even if I set it to ignore maps, and I have to go in and set it back to whom the maps are for.
    (EDIT)
    Or what vwrangler posted on the former page.
    Post edited by ZarconDeeGrissom on
  • Oso3DOso3D Posts: 13,392
    edited December 1969

    vwrangler said:
    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.

    !!!!!!!!!!!!!

    OH THANK YOU

    Among other things, this now means I can use Skin Builder with G2M! WOOT. Thankyouthankyouthankyou

  • SickleYieldSickleYield Posts: 7,318
    edited December 1969

    vwrangler said:
    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.

    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!

  • 8eos88eos8 Posts: 166
    edited December 1969

    Slide3D said:
    Olympia HD
    is that? Pleas don't take this the wrong way, I thought she was much darker toned then that.

    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.

  • SickleYieldSickleYield Posts: 7,318
    edited March 2015

    8eos8 said:
    Slide3D said:
    Olympia HD
    is that? Pleas don't take this the wrong way, I thought she was much darker toned then that.

    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.

    Post edited by SickleYield on
  • Oso3DOso3D Posts: 13,392
    edited December 1969

    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.

  • D-A KrossD-A Kross Posts: 59
    edited December 1969

    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.

  • RiggswolfeRiggswolfe Posts: 791
    edited December 1969

    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.

  • ZarconDeeGrissomZarconDeeGrissom Posts: 5,293
    edited March 2015

    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.

    yep. And considerable map manipulation is also needed.
    Quick Material settings tweaks for the Optimized bases: Take specular maps out of color channels. Put the specular map in Glossy Layered Weight. Base color: if the texture is good, leave this white or maybe tone it down to: R 223, G 245, B 255.
    Refraction Index: 1.44, not 1.33... 1.33 is water, skin is 1.44 Change Top Coat Layering Mode to Fresnel and set the Top Coat IOR to 1.44... that's guess/approximation because the top coat is not skin, its the layer of oils on the skin and I have not found a recorded IOR for that. You can tweak the translucence color. Put the color maps in translucence color in for all skin surfaces... this is a hack. Its better if you have a mask for the face only... if you don't have one you have to apply the color maps to all the skin surfaces otherwise the translucence color on the body parts will not match. You can also tweak the transmitted color. Put bump maps in the Top Coat Bump, leave it at 1.00 or adjust upwards as necessary. Lips are hard. Sometimes I leave them alone, sometimes I copy the face settings (on guys who aren't wearing lip gloss... I don't usually render women, call it a preference).
    SkinToIray_CtrlClickIgnorMaps_001.png
    1828 x 694 - 384K
    Post edited by ZarconDeeGrissom on
  • Oso3DOso3D Posts: 13,392
    edited December 1969

    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)

  • Arnold CArnold C Posts: 740
    edited April 2015

    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.

    Refined_Genesis_2_Female_Iray_MAT.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 266K
    Post edited by Arnold C on
  • evilded777evilded777 Posts: 2,243
    edited December 1969

    MBusch said:
    Jayden with Logan texture and Real Short Hair, my skin materials.

    Not sure how I feel about this... its quite saturated, maybe a tad too glossy. Artistically, I like it.

    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.

  • 8eos88eos8 Posts: 166
    edited December 1969

    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.

    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.

    skintest7-hd-bump5.0-basetop_.jpg
    1000 x 1200 - 624K
    skintest7-hd-bump2.0-basetop_.jpg
    1000 x 1200 - 609K
    skintest7-hd-bump0.45_.jpg
    1000 x 1200 - 609K
  • MBuschMBusch Posts: 533
    edited December 1969

    MBusch said:
    Jayden with Logan texture and Real Short Hair, my skin materials.

    Not sure how I feel about this... its quite saturated, maybe a tad too glossy. Artistically, I like it.

    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.

    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/

    Raw.jpg
    1000 x 1300 - 770K
  • j cadej cade Posts: 1,542
    edited December 1969

    8eos8 said:
    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.

    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.

Sign In or Register to comment.