WHY!?!

AlienRenders

Wait wait wait. You can output sRGB profile in renders? HOW?!?!? Please, someone tell me this secret! I've actually implemented colour management support in software before. So I know the intimite details of how this stuff works, but never found a way to get DAZ to use any colour management. Can you get it to convert textures to sRGB? Is that what it does by default? What if a texture has no ICC profile? Does it assume it's sRGB? I looked at the render settings and was happy to see a White Point setting (and of course gamma). I clicked on the White Point setting and it appears to be RGB instead of Lab or XYZ. What the hell? Then again, I can't be sure because it's displaying floating point values (but the dialog is RGB). Wish it would indicate the colour space of the White Point. Some presets like D50 and D65 would be nice. (edit: Wait, D65 is around 0.3 for a and b. And for XYZ, it needs to allow for higher than 1.0. So the White Point setting has to be RGB. ugh.)

Also, when it renders, I'm pretty sure it's not doing any colour management when it displays it. It'd be nice if it grabbed my monitor's ICC profile. But I'll settle for sRGB output. If someone can point me the way, I'd be ever so grateful.

 

Oso3D

After some hunting, I've determined a few interesting things:

The base Phillip and Bree skins are available in Base (Fe)male, and in V5/M5 forms. These are the only skins I own that have decent/proper translucence weight maps (they also have SSS color maps, but I don't find those useful in Iray).

It's important to keep it straight, however -- I've been running into problems using 'Bree' for V5 skins, only to have patches and garble because I'm ACTUALLY using Base Female UV mapped Bree. Ooooh.

 

(In my files, at least, the files are located in C:\Users\Public\Documents\My DAZ 3D Library\Runtime\Textures\DAZ\Characters\Genesis2\BaseFemale and C:\Users\Public\Documents\My DAZ 3D Library\Runtime\Textures\DAZ\Characters\MilWom\V5

Your mileage may vary)

In this way, you can apply decent translucence to a very large range of skins.

 

murgatroyd314

CypherFOX said:

Greetings,

A few small notes...

I think @Sonja11 is referring to this thread, which might be helpful.

Murgatroyd said:

Rashad Carter said:

In nature objects do not glow unless they are high in temperature, so Emission requires temperature settings in order to operate.

Quick question. In nature, objects can and do glow without being high in temperature (see fluorescence, chemiluminescence, shrimpoluminescence, etc). How do unbiased engines deal with this sort of thing, since Emission as you describe it doesn't sound like it would do the job?

Yeah, that's part of what Rashad kinda handwaved over.  The term 'temperature' is referring to a theoretical 'black body emitter', which at very specific temperatures emits certain specific wavelengths of light which correspond to colors.

It's a useful theoretic construct, but it doesn't have much to do with actual temperatures.

--  Morgan

Yes, I am somewhat familiar with the concept of black body radiation. My point was that the set of wavelengths resulting from nonthermal luminescence may be completely different from a blackbody curve.

Rashad Carter

Murgatroyd said:

CypherFOX said:

Greetings,

A few small notes...

I think @Sonja11 is referring to this thread, which might be helpful.

Murgatroyd said:

Rashad Carter said:

In nature objects do not glow unless they are high in temperature, so Emission requires temperature settings in order to operate.

Quick question. In nature, objects can and do glow without being high in temperature (see fluorescence, chemiluminescence, shrimpoluminescence, etc). How do unbiased engines deal with this sort of thing, since Emission as you describe it doesn't sound like it would do the job?

Yeah, that's part of what Rashad kinda handwaved over.  The term 'temperature' is referring to a theoretical 'black body emitter', which at very specific temperatures emits certain specific wavelengths of light which correspond to colors.

It's a useful theoretic construct, but it doesn't have much to do with actual temperatures.

--  Morgan

Yes, I am somewhat familiar with the concept of black body radiation. My point was that the set of wavelengths resulting from nonthermal luminescence may be completely different from a blackbody curve.

I should have said that in nature most objects only glow due to some form of thermal excitement. Clearly exposure to powerful electromagnetic fields can also produce light in cases such as neon lights. There are indeed exceptions such as those mentioned above, but they are very rare outside the realm of living organisms. Not many arbtitrarily occuring flourecent lights for example, but lots of examples of fire. But yes, you are indeed correct, the set of values will be completely different and very difficult to represent with any degree of accuracy. Accounting for these thermal exceptions, most unbiased engines allow for arbitrary light colors to be assigned to emitters, it doesnt necessarily have to be based on a blackbody curve, its just usually better when it is.