Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.Daz 3D is part of
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Not Poser-only although some products are. Fawne for example comes with a V4 and Genesis version, and textures for both Poser and DS.
Just like a lot of products here at DAZ.OK found her...
Victoria 4.2 Morphs ++, TheGirl4, Genesis Evolution Morphs, ?Genesis V4 Shapes?
That's going to end up quite expensive to test. Pleas don't take this the wrong way Silver and SickleYield, I'd rather have MicroraptorDR converted to DazStudio. Then to fuss with V4 figures that don't end up in the smart tab to chose for scenes.
However, Sapphira with Xylia hair and SySweater & SyKnitPants. Before fussing with any mats.
(Edit)
Added a side by side render of her, in 3DL, in my test chamber, so I had a clear idea what to shoot for with her texture. (I'll reserve my Face-Plant gripes for another time).
She needs a 3DL AltShader, and an Iray shader as well.
(EDIT 12Apr2015, My intention was, I'm going to do that, make a set of mats presets for her, to make life easier for me)
Thanks all for this post - I'm learning so much.
Here's where I'm at on my iRay sss journey. The main things I've learned that might help other is:
1) if you use "scatter and transmit" to emulate shaders like the sss shader in Mental Ray you'll need to lighten you're diffuse map. I did it by duplicating the map, and giving it a 50% screen layer mode, then masking out eyebrows.
2) You can use your metallic flakes layers as an extra top most mix layer by turning the glossiness down to 0 to help bring back detail. This gives you the three layers found in MR sss shaders.
3) Last off, I did need to create new normal maps in Mudbox to get the pore detail. There's only so much bump maps can do.
Here's M6-Nevio and V6-Belle with no post work.
Needless to say, lighting is everything - this is the HDR lighting rig I bought from the Foundry and then added a rim light. There have been a number of posts on available free studio HDR environment maps around. I've included the settings I'm using with this rig.
I'm not pleased yet with these but getting closer to where i want to be. Hopefully something here sparks an idea the way the many posts here did for me.
Again, thanks all for keeping the info flowing
Not Poser-only although some products are. Fawne for example comes with a V4 and Genesis version, and textures for both Poser and DS.
Just like a lot of products here at DAZ.OK found her...
Victoria 4.2 Morphs ++, TheGirl4, Genesis Evolution Morphs, ?Genesis V4 Shapes?
That's going to end up quite expensive to test. Pleas don't take this the wrong way Silver and SickleYield, I'd rather have MicroraptorDR converted to DazStudio. Then to fuss with V4 figures that don't end up in the smart tab to chose for scenes.
However, Sapphira with Xylia hair and SySweater & SyKnitPants. Before fussing with any mats.
(Edit)
Added a side by side render of her, in 3DL, in my test chamber, so I had a clear idea what to shoot for with her texture. (I'll reserve my Face-Plant gripes for another time). She needs a 3DL AltShader, and an Iray shader as well.
I don't care, I just happened to have it and thought it was cute, so I thought I'd put up the preset for if anyone else thought so too. The assumption is that if you don't have or want Fawne you would ctrl+click the preset onto another mid-toned skin, or save it as a mapless material (as we now can do).
Victoria 4.2 Morphs ++, TheGirl4, Genesis Evolution Morphs, ?Genesis V4 Shapes?
That's going to end up quite expensive to test. Pleas don't take this the wrong way Silver and SickleYield, I'd rather have MicroraptorDR converted to DazStudio. Then to fuss with V4 figures that don't end up in the smart tab to chose for scenes.
However, Sapphira with Xylia hair and SySweater & SyKnitPants. Before fussing with any mats.
(Edit)
Added a side by side render of her, in 3DL, in my test chamber, so I had a clear idea what to shoot for with her texture. (I'll reserve my Face-Plant gripes for another time). She needs a 3DL AltShader, and an Iray shader as well.
I don't care, I just happened to have it and thought it was cute, so I thought I'd put up the preset for if anyone else thought so too. The assumption is that if you don't have or want Fawne you would ctrl+click the preset onto another mid-toned skin, or save it as a mapless material (as we now can do).Sorry, My choice of words was unfortunate. I only have four figures from Renderosity and none from RuntimeDNA. One of the four just happens to be by Silver, that was the sole bases of my decision with choosing Sapphira.
Never did I intend to say nor imply that any figures were not attractive, only questioning the ease of use in studio. And the requirements needed for using Fawne with Genesis. I don't have anything other then that Victoria... a link is shorter.
http://www.daz3d.com/victoria-4-3d-model-pro-suite
I still haven't located over half the stuff in the CL from that. Tho I'm sure "TheGirl4" was not part of that. I think I have the V4thing for Genesis , not sure yet. The description dose not say what is required for the Genesis version.
Assuming I'm even looking at the correct Fawne? Sorry, I should have never mentioned Microraptor, that is something to bring up over there.
(EDIT)
I'm having difficulty locating "Genesis V4 Shapes" in the daz store, is that also a 'R' product (what 'R' site?)?
I do have this.
http://www.daz3d.com/v4-and-m4-shapes-for-genesis
While not, strictly speaking, skin, I've been playing around with Tooth settings.
I went with the SSS .1 distance, .99 weight, -.35 angle. Nothing special there.
But I went with 1.0 translucency and an off-white.
Decently glossy, and, importantly, I upped Bump to 3 -- normal real teeth are a little uneven, and without decent bump they end up looking very artificial (unless that's your goal)
Victoria 4.2 Morphs ++, TheGirl4, Genesis Evolution Morphs, ?Genesis V4 Shapes?
That's going to end up quite expensive to test. Pleas don't take this the wrong way Silver and SickleYield, I'd rather have MicroraptorDR converted to DazStudio. Then to fuss with V4 figures that don't end up in the smart tab to chose for scenes.
However, Sapphira with Xylia hair and SySweater & SyKnitPants. Before fussing with any mats.
(Edit)
Added a side by side render of her, in 3DL, in my test chamber, so I had a clear idea what to shoot for with her texture. (I'll reserve my Face-Plant gripes for another time). She needs a 3DL AltShader, and an Iray shader as well.
I don't care, I just happened to have it and thought it was cute, so I thought I'd put up the preset for if anyone else thought so too. The assumption is that if you don't have or want Fawne you would ctrl+click the preset onto another mid-toned skin, or save it as a mapless material (as we now can do).Sorry, My choice of words was unfortunate. I only have four figures from Renderosity and none from RuntimeDNA. One of the four just happens to be by Silver, that was the sole bases of my decision with choosing Sapphira.
Never did I intend to say nor imply that any figures were not attractive, only questioning the ease of use in studio. And the requirements needed for using Fawne with Genesis. I don't have anything other then that Victoria... a link is shorter.
http://www.daz3d.com/victoria-4-3d-model-pro-suite
I still haven't located over half the stuff in the CL from that. Tho I'm sure "TheGirl4" was not part of that. I think I have the V4thing for Genesis , not sure yet. The description dose not say what is required for the Genesis version.
Assuming I'm even looking at the correct Fawne? Sorry, I should have never mentioned Microraptor, that is something to bring up over there.
(EDIT)
I'm having difficulty locating "Genesis V4 Shapes" in the daz store, is that also a 'R' product (what 'R' site?)?
I do have this.
http://www.daz3d.com/v4-and-m4-shapes-for-genesis
That's the one. Load Genesis 1, select it in Scene tab, look for Victoria 4 in the Shaping tab, push the slider to the max. :)
Tjohn, I will give it a shot, as soon as the bank tells me it's cleared. Thanks Silver, Just blame it on the "Edit Monkeys", lol.
I've been studying glamour shots (though it took a while since if you just plug in 'glamour shots' in Google you end up with hideously amusing ironic stuff), and grabbed this for inspiration:
http://glamourphotoshop.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Glamour-Shots-5.jpg
Note how the teeth are basically translucent gray.
That might not be universal, but I like the results going in that direction.
OK, I'm missing something, lol. with Fawn kind of loaded, at least the head dialed in, the mat apply only appears to set some "V4LanaRR" mat set??? I'm sure that is the plane old Genesis mat.
Also, Genesis is now kicking a 'Duplicate ID' error when loading. So I can only guess I put Fawne in the wrong content library "My Library"? Was that supposed to go in the DIM side "My Daz3D Library"? That or I was only supposed to install (copy over) just the V4 or the Genesis one, not both.
I'm still looking threw CL folders in Studio, tho that 'Duplicate ID' error has me asking, What did I break.
And applying the SyMat on G2F still kicks a bunch of errors.
OK, here is the same preset, after clicking skip a dozen times and just tossing it threw Iray.
The SSS is incredible, and the translucency is looking realy nice on the ears.
http://www.daz3d.com/alessa
was the base before going threw the mat preset change. I'm off now to try to find the rest of Fawne in the CL. I think a mat didn't get loaded somewhere.
Tutorial: Skin Shader
This may help someone.
http://www.marmoset.co/toolbag/learn/skin-shader
Progress, I think. Not sure entirely yet. Reduced the Translucency Weight to 0.25 and set a map back to Fawne Makeup from NoMakeup???
This looks amazing.
BUT
was this a typo and you meant to say displacement instead of normal?
Why not use DISPLACEMENT maps to create realistic shadows for face details?
Both bump and normal maps do NOT allow for proper shadow calculations.
- - -
Using bump and normal maps for the finer details is a technique for game engine models when the idea is too save resources, processor calculations and memory space.
For realistic prerendered computer graphic images the goal should be to use displacement everywhere for all the tiny details on hero objects in the foreground of the image.
It DOES matter if shadows are calculated properly for the fine details as well.
Even if you think that you cannot notice it on a concious level it is exactly those fake bump and normal map shadow results that make it possible to still identify any computer graphic image.
- - -
Bump and normal maps still have their place in the background to save resources where it will not be noticeable.
But on any object in the foreground you may want to use only displacement maps if you aim for photo realism.
- - -
Image example:
The mole next to the right eye would not cast a realistic shadow if bump or normal maps were used.
The same would be true for the displaced eye brows and all the tiny pores.
Disclaimer: This image was rendered with a displacement map but not in Iray.
The results in Iray nevertheless would be the same as the same rules apply for displacement maps.
In Iray, I don't know if it makes a difference yet, tho with 3delight there is a very distinct difference in how shadows behave
As for my litle experiment. I think it is getting there, tho I think I cut back on the redness a little bit much first blind shot. Here's the finished spot-render next to a promo of the original mat. (No not the same figure shape. Still, both by Silver.).
No, in Iray normals are your better choice. PBRs are made to handle normals for this instance more than the costs associated with displacement.
love your settings
here a render with your settings (and your changes 1-3 but my normal map came from Photoshop)
3 Point Lighting + HDR
ISO 100, 2.8 F/Stop
Focal Length 35mm
Skin: RM Arabelle
Morph: RM Arabelle & V6 HD
No, in Iray normals are your better choice. PBRs are made to handle normals for this instance more than the costs associated with displacement.
I figured out so far that PBR are physical based render engines.
But I was not able to understand what you mean by:
are made to handle normals for this instance more than the costs associated with displacement
My main experience is with OctaneRender and also e-vue.
I admit that I have very little experience with Iray.
But in all three render engines you get only realistic shadow calculation with displacement maps.
I made the extra effort to create examples in both Iray and OctaneRender.
You can clearly see that in the displacement maps examples the shadows are correctly based on the sun position both in Iray and OctaneRender.
In both cases in the normal map version the shadows are all over the place and certainly not reacting in any realistic way to the sun direction.
The shadows should only appear on lower ledges facing away from the sun.
But in both the Iray and the OctaneRender normal map example you see "shadows" faked at the upper side of the ledges that are actually facing the sun.
IF I have the settings wrong please post an image with the proper settings showing the shadows reacting to the sun direction in Iray with normal maps applied.
Of course when working with fine displacement like pores in skin settings this is less noticeable.
But IF you are aiming for photo realistic renders of characters such details are important.
I figured out so far that PBR are physical based render engines.
But I was not able to understand what you mean by:
are made to handle normals for this instance more than the costs associated with displacement
My main experience is with OctaneRender and also e-vue.
I admit that I have very little experience with Iray.
But in all three render engines you get only realistic shadow calculation with displacement maps.
I made the extra effort to create examples in both Iray and OctaneRender.
You can clearly see that in the displacement maps examples the shadows are correctly based on the sun position both in Iray and OctaneRender.
In both cases in the normal map version the shadows are all over the place and certainly not reacting in any realistic way to the sun direction.
The shadows should only appear on lower ledges facing away from the sun.
But in both the Iray and the OctaneRender normal map example you see "shadows" faked at the upper side of the ledges that are actually facing the sun.
IF I have the settings wrong please post an image with the proper settings showing the shadows reacting the the sun direction in Iray with normal maps applied.
Of course when working with fine displacement like pores in skin settings this is less noticeable.
But IF you are aiming for photo realistic renders of characters such details are important.
The cost you get are at the expense of subdividing the mesh when using displacement maps. Normal maps are part of a proper PBR workflow, displacement generally isn't. You can plug them in and there and there are settings, but normal maps are what you use.
I'm experimenting with skin settings in Iray for a while now and have a general question - the SSS direction should have an impact on the outcome of a render, I can see that when experimenting with a sphere primitive, but it's harder with a complete figure to see the differences. The MAT settings of DAZ are -0.5., but I get the same result also with +1.0, so what is related to that? Possibly it's more complex than I can understand. :(
My aim with Iray is to get the best possible render result with the existing maps of a character rather than to generate new things for every skin.
As I understand it, -.5 scatters mostly back but not completely, while +1 scatters very strongly along the direction light moves.
I think with skin what the result will be is that 'thin' stuff, like ears and fingers, will show a strong effect regardless (though in slightly different ways), while larger parts of the body will only show a lot of SSS with negative values, because otherwise the effect is lost in the mass of body.
I think.
In any case, all of this is REALLY SUBTLE, so it's hard to be sure. And it probably doesn't matter a huge amount. ;)
Frankly, with skin, I think translucency is going to be 90% of any observed effect, so I wouldn't worry too much about it unless you want photo portrait closeups.
Photo portrait closeups or more distant figure portraits, I only want a kind of believable render result. I have also noticed that SSS won't even show up when there's no translucency - so my observations where in the right direction. Thanks for the answer! :)
Can you share the source you got that gave you the information that a "proper" PBR workflow uses normal maps?
Can you indicate a web page that suggests you should use normal maps in a PBR workflow if you are aiming for photo realism?
There must have been some kind of missunderstanding.
If you read up to date articles like those published in 3D world you will find that they suggest to use displacment maps when aiming for photo realism.
Only when you read articles about game engines and real time rendering you will find people recommending to use normal maps because in those areas saving resources still matters.
You certainly do not want to suggest that those people who are published in 3D world have no clue what they are writing about?
- - -
Can you share the source you got that gave you the information that a "proper" PBR workflow uses normal maps?
Can you indicate a web page that suggests you should use normal maps in a PBR workflow if you are aiming for photo realism?
There must have been some kind of missunderstanding.
If you read up to date articles like those published in 3D world you will find that they suggest to use displacment maps when aiming for photo realism.
Only when you read articles about game engines and real time rendering you will find people recommending to use normal maps because in those areas saving resources still matters.
You certainly do not want to suggest that those people who are published in 3D world have no clue what they are writing about?
- - -
If it's on a G2, or multiple G2's in a scene, it's not going to be a few seconds, it's going to add minutes to hours depending on how many there are. That is an unacceptable cost in a professional pipeline where you're not doing one render, you're doing eight to ten at a time.
My cursory research just now indicates that most artists consider displacement superior in terms of appearance, but the performance cost of using it on everything to be too high, so it should only be used where it's really visible and really counts. For high-frequency details where they aren't meant to really pop bits of mesh away from the others, it should always be normal maps.
Can anyone point me to an idiot guide to normal maps? I don't know... anything about them. I've been relying on bump map when speed is needed or the model isn't really close-up, and displacement when I can otherwise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQrHkKnSBcA
I tried both positive and negative direction and didn't see any difference. There must be something but till now all my experiment show the same results. Does work well enough to show translucency only on thin parts like in the scene below where you see it also on the fingers.
Scene is lit with one IBL and one photometric spotlight
That is pretty much what I suggested in the first post:
Use displacement maps for the hero object in the foreground and use normal maps for the other objects in the background.
Should it not be up to the customer to deceide if for them it is worth the longer render time to achieve higher realism?
The issue here is that even when I wanted to be able to fiddle with the Iray displacement skin settings I cannot because most artists did not even bother to give the customer a choice and did not include displacement maps.
If all characters sold at the DAZ store would have both normal and displacement maps versions then each customer could actually choose on a case by case basis if they want to use the displacement version or the normal map version. :exclaim:
- - -
I hope that some other artists have a more open ear for customers who would like to accept the longer render times to get more realistic shadow details on the skin.
I was actually looking forward to see the first DAZ character skins released for Iray.
But now I am somewhat dissappointed to read that artists still want to stick with their old way of creating characters as they have done for 3Delight.
- - -
Issue 195 of 3D world will include a free 228 page book.
The focus is: "Master the art of photoreal portraits"
The public release is on April 22 (2015).
Maybe reading trough it will give some artists motivation to learn new techniques to create characters that are optimized for Iray and other physical based render engines.
- - -
I think when you use displacement vs when you use a normal map would really depend on how much up down detail you needed for an object. A character that has a mole that casts notable shadows would more than likely not be the standard female character. Most moles on people only pop up fractionally and shouldn't cast a noticeable shadow anyway. Very few people are going to have a wart or some other large deformation of the skin surface and even then the shadowing is very minimal. So human figures likely would be a waste of render time for displacement unless your doing a stereotypical witch with exaggerated moles and warts.
Architectural displacement maps are a different game all together and more than likely on a much lower poly figure/prop. Doubling the count on a 2000 poly object will not have the same effect as doubling the count as a 60k object. In that case the exchange is between modeling in all those extra details vs having them via displacement and more than likely the displacement is still saving time vs all the added polys.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQrHkKnSBcA
I hate to seem ungrateful, but anything that's not video?
(I really really don't like video tutorials)
There is always the wiki- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_mapping. It however shows a high poly object that is normal mapped and then decimated to be lower poly count. I know a few people that do things similar to that in order get very detailed textures but in most cases we are working with a situation where the mesh will not be decimated to a much lower poly count and are only working on additive details on top of the existing poly count.