TBH, I don't know... I never use Filament drawstyle but just the error message you posted indicates to it. Probably the issue results from the shader conversion with Filament ~~

      Hiya, I expect to have to mess with the teeth anyway. My issue with it is the lots of "materials not found" warning, but then it seems to load okay, though I haven't checked all the stuff like the eyes normal. (manual install, but if it was wrong it just wouldn't work)  I'm quite aware of the basic skin since I only use Filament at this point, so it seemed odd not to see any of the texture lines under the eyes in the promo pix. However I can see a little in the above render. I'll probably erase them in GIMP./ peace

cain-x said:

DAZ's implementation of Filament is incomplete - you'll likely need to wait until the next major release is out, there has been work done as shown in the changelog. I am one of those users who is hoping that Filament becomes more useful for renders/animations.

 I found an alternative with Cinema 4d, the viewport is similar to filaments but without the opacity bug. You just have to activate the opengl options in preferences for it to work correctly and the lights must be in spotlight.

cain-x said:

DAZ's implementation of Filament is incomplete - you'll likely need to wait until the next major release is out, there has been work done as shown in the changelog. I am one of those users who is hoping that Filament becomes more useful for renders/animations.

 I found an alternative with Cinema 4d, the viewport is similar to filaments but without the opacity bug. You just have to activate the opengl options in preferences for it to work correctly and the lights must be in spotlight.

@3DmentiaNull : I just tested to confirm what I thought : in FILAMENT you have no impact of the tan/tan lines settings in the viewport. This is really an "Iray made for and optimized for" product.

    Thanks for your transparency! (pardon the pun) actually I'm still considering getting it for the transparencies/bump/normals, cause it might be useful in my limited expectations. Since Filament has some use of the Iray shader, I finally tried out "Wet Body Iray" for G3F by SimonWM, and not even taking the time to read the instructions just started experimenting with loading those bump or opacity maps on a geo shell and playing with the opacity, metalicity, dual lobe, glossiness, etc., it was pretty useful IMO. Nothing like a long render, of course. I switched to Iray viewport, to see how nice it might be, and it looked like there weren't any shells applied! (I'm clueless with Iray) Question : would your gamma adjustment be visable in Filament viewport , as in making a skin more pale? (if you have a chance to test) Thanks for responding! / / peace

The only things I can think of is for you to look to see if the render is using the correct viewport - for example, I often use the "Aux Viewport" using a different camera view/position to the main viewport when working on a scene. However, if that "Aux Viewport" was used last and I hit render it will render using that view instead. This could be more confusing if you use one of the multi-view options in the view port with each view using a different view angle on the scene. Depending on your window theme there should be a coloured "highlight" border around your currently selected view and that is what will be used for the render. Perhaps click once in the view that you want to render from to double-check that you will render from the place you expect.

It could be that the thing you posted in supposed to be there - although that would be odd since it looks like a close-up of a map or something inside a woodern frame stuck to an off-white wall which does not seem to match up with the scene you are expected. However, if it is the case then you should check the parameters (Display section) of the objects in your scene that are missing and see if you have "Visible in render" turned off.

The flip-side of this is you could have accidentally added a random wall to your scene, right in front of the camera and accidentally set that to be not visible in the viewport and maybe not selectable in the viewport. In fact, if would be a good idea to view the front of your camera in the scene and make sure there is nothing intersecting with the lens - don't use iray or filament to check this as you want something that more of a raw view. If there is something there - even if you think it shouldn't block the camera try removing/hiding it and change back to the camera view to try a new render.

it definitely depends on the hair

some strandbased hairs are fine but there are a lot that are way too resource intensive for my use

I do animations though, I tend to use it more for short hair myself without simulating it and thus saving myself from grief, it's actually good for Filament renders with line tesselation and PR visibility enabled because geometry hair has cutout opacity that Filament doesn't render well

to be honest that is probably the only time I use it

Consder it as an iray product only. You would probably be very disappointed using it with filament. My computer is not available right now to check it but my intuition is that most of the shader mixer features allowing the wet or tan looks are iray only, not filament. Edit : concerning animations using the shader only features in iray (not the shells for wet) has either no or positive effects on ender speed (using iray)

  Hi there, I only use Filament drawstyle at this point. Questions : how much of this product creates visable results in the Filament viewport and what doesn't? And how much would that probably slow down an animated figure in realtime? Thanks / peace

4.22.1.202 (September 6, 2024)

• Filament Draw Options node
  • ...
• Tonemapper Options node
  • ...
• Metadata (Install Manager / Daz Connect)
  • ...
• Panes
  • Smart Content pane
    • ...
  • Content Library pane
    • ...
  • Render Settings Pane
    • ...
  • Simulation Settings pane
    • ...
  • Draw Settings pane
    • ...
  • Scene pane
    • ...
  • Parameters pane
    • ...
  • Posing pane
    • ...
  • Shaping pane
    • ...
  • Surfaces pane
    • ...
  • Lights pane
    • ...
  • Cameras pane
    • ...
  • Shader Mixer pane
    • ...
• Tools
  • Weight Map Brush
    • ...
  • Geometry Editor
    • ...
• Save Filter dialogs
  • ...
• Create New Property dialog
  • ...
• Logging
  • ...
• ...
• Scripting API
  • Made additions in various areas; see the Change Log for more detail
• Fixed bugs and/or made improvements in various areas; see the Change Log for details

RevokedRevenant said:

Greetings,

This time it's a weird one 

For the visual style i want to achieve i'm perfectly happy with the iRay Preview only. I basically never render, just save the iRay Preview drawings and then do some little postwork in Photoshop.

Now i'd love to try some animations with the same style, but as @crosswind once said to me in the forum that's not possible, either you render an animation in iRay, Filament or OpenGL.

Since i'm stubborn (and i do programming work for a living) i've been thinking to create a script that does this:

1. select the first frame of an animation (currently in the timeline, of course)
2. load iRay Preview for, lets say, 10 seconds
3. save the current viewport drawing
4. select the next animation frame
5. keep going until the last frame

Now, for the question: since i don't have a lot of free time i'd like to know in advance if that's feasible with the DAZ scripting system/language, before i start studying it. Or, if is not, if there is a better way to achieve this goal (that doesn't include doing each step manually )

a big Thank You in advance

Ha ~~ I even don't remember if I ever told that to you... So what was the context to which I ever reverted to your thread / question ?  ...and with which way that I said it's not possible... with Daz Script ?

Short answer: Yes! (I use this often)

---Basic method: Output an Image Sequence, then use e.g. VirtualDub to stitch into a movie----------------

var OutPutPath = '/MyFiles/';

var FileNamePrefix = 'MyMovie_';

var MSecsPerFrame = 3000;     // Depending on Scene, Renderer (Iray/OpenGL/Filament/etc.), and GPU speed

var Viewport = MainWindow.getViewportMgr().getActiveViewport().get3DViewport();

// For each Frame # Fnum:

          Scene.setFrame( Fnum );

          sleep( MSecsPerFrame );

          // Save Image:
          var NumStr      = Fnum.toString();      // You may want to '0'-pad this
          var FileSpec    = OutputPath + FileNamePrefix + NumStr + '.png';

          // Note: With Iray this outputs the Viewport contents,
          //  which may be different from the Viewport Camera dimensions, etc.
          //  Using File > Save last draw... can give different output.
          Viewport.captureImage().save( FileSpec );

---End--------------------------------------------------

There are some other threads about this:

https://hpclscruffy.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/452226/file-save-last-draw-bitmap-can-a-script-access-that

https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/512116/a-simple-script-to-utilize-the-viewport-preview-to-dramatically-redcue-animation-render-times

 

Greetings,

This time it's a weird one 

For the visual style i want to achieve i'm perfectly happy with the iRay Preview only. I basically never render, just save the iRay Preview drawings and then do some little postwork in Photoshop.

Now i'd love to try some animations with the same style, but as @crosswind once said to me in the forum that's not possible, either you render an animation in iRay, Filament or OpenGL.

Since i'm stubborn (and i do programming work for a living) i've been thinking to create a script that does this:

1. select the first frame of an animation (currently in the timeline, of course)
2. load iRay Preview for, lets say, 10 seconds
3. save the current viewport drawing
4. select the next animation frame
5. keep going until the last frame

Now, for the question: since i don't have a lot of free time i'd like to know in advance if that's feasible with the DAZ scripting system/language, before i start studying it. Or, if is not, if there is a better way to achieve this goal (that doesn't include doing each step manually )

a big Thank You in advance

bluejaunte said:

charles said:

bluejaunte said:

charles said:

bluejaunte said:

It's really not Iray at that point, right? Man, this whole AI thing is really turning things upside down.

It is still Iray. AI is used as a post processing touchup, that's it. How much you want to keep of your Iray original image is up to you. But I often let things like backgrounds and fingers fall through to the original Iray render, keeping just the parts of the AI that improve the features I need it to. I'll put together a better demonstration later this week.

Iray is involved, of course. But the photorealism does not come from Iray. Not in the video example you showed anyway. Iray is only used to give the absolute basics to the AI which does the heavy lifting. I'd be hesitant to call this post processing.

Absolutely nothing wrong with that. I'm just saying this has little to do with Iray. Could use any other crap renderer. Probably even Filament or a screenshot of the viewport.

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you. Your gallery shows clear signs of relying heavily on Photoshop, particularly with one-click filters. If you believe in taking things to the next level, then it seems contradictory to have a gallery dominated by Photoshop filtering.

The AI actually enhances the Iray render in ways that go beyond what Photoshop filters can achieve. And the best part is, you can still go back and add post-processing in Photoshop if you want—I do it too! This can help fix issues like bad shading, specular highlights, and other Daz-related quirks. But at the end of the day, it's your art, and it's totally up to you how you want to refine it.

 

 

 

In Photoshop, when you're adding filters and maybe correct the exposure or things like that, you're trying to enhance the render. AI regenerates the whole image completely. Even if you force it to stay as close to the original as possible, it still technically generates a new image. Hence, to me at least, what you're seeing after that is not Iray. It is an AI-generated image that was made from an Iray render, and you could have used any other renderer, even probably a Filament image as mentioned. It's just a matter of prompting and settings.

An equivalent could be photoshopping a face from a real photo onto your render. Nobody would call this post processing. But it doesn't matter much, nobody cares in the end what was used as long as it looks good. But this is a thread about Iray photorealism so I feel it's at least worth pointing out that we are leaving that realm once AI image generation is involved.

It's still interesting though! Please don't take this the wrong way and by all means continue to show your results :)

I agree, in the end it's all about the results. I have been using Daz for a very long time now, and struggled with getting results to look as realistic as possible. So for me, I see this as a means to an end. 

charles said:

bluejaunte said:

charles said:

bluejaunte said:

It's really not Iray at that point, right? Man, this whole AI thing is really turning things upside down.

It is still Iray. AI is used as a post processing touchup, that's it. How much you want to keep of your Iray original image is up to you. But I often let things like backgrounds and fingers fall through to the original Iray render, keeping just the parts of the AI that improve the features I need it to. I'll put together a better demonstration later this week.

Iray is involved, of course. But the photorealism does not come from Iray. Not in the video example you showed anyway. Iray is only used to give the absolute basics to the AI which does the heavy lifting. I'd be hesitant to call this post processing.

Absolutely nothing wrong with that. I'm just saying this has little to do with Iray. Could use any other crap renderer. Probably even Filament or a screenshot of the viewport.

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you. Your gallery shows clear signs of relying heavily on Photoshop, particularly with one-click filters. If you believe in taking things to the next level, then it seems contradictory to have a gallery dominated by Photoshop filtering.

The AI actually enhances the Iray render in ways that go beyond what Photoshop filters can achieve. And the best part is, you can still go back and add post-processing in Photoshop if you want—I do it too! This can help fix issues like bad shading, specular highlights, and other Daz-related quirks. But at the end of the day, it's your art, and it's totally up to you how you want to refine it.

 

 

 

In Photoshop, when you're adding filters and maybe correct the exposure or things like that, you're trying to enhance the render. AI regenerates the whole image completely. Even if you force it to stay as close to the original as possible, it still technically generates a new image. Hence, to me at least, what you're seeing after that is not Iray. It is an AI-generated image that was made from an Iray render, and you could have used any other renderer, even probably a Filament image as mentioned. It's just a matter of prompting and settings.

An equivalent could be photoshopping a face from a real photo onto your render. Nobody would call this post processing. But it doesn't matter much, nobody cares in the end what was used as long as it looks good. But this is a thread about Iray photorealism so I feel it's at least worth pointing out that we are leaving that realm once AI image generation is involved.

It's still interesting though! Please don't take this the wrong way and by all means continue to show your results :)

charles said:

bluejaunte said:

It's really not Iray at that point, right? Man, this whole AI thing is really turning things upside down.

It is still Iray. AI is used as a post processing touchup, that's it. How much you want to keep of your Iray original image is up to you. But I often let things like backgrounds and fingers fall through to the original Iray render, keeping just the parts of the AI that improve the features I need it to. I'll put together a better demonstration later this week.

Iray is involved, of course. But the photorealism does not come from Iray. Not in the video example you showed anyway. Iray is only used to give the absolute basics to the AI which does the heavy lifting. I'd be hesitant to call this post processing.

Absolutely nothing wrong with that. I'm just saying this has little to do with Iray. Could use any other crap renderer. Probably even Filament or a screenshot of the viewport.

Richard Haseltine said:

Are you talking about the z ordering? That applies to OpenGL too - fixing it would significantly impact performance, which isn't (or at least wasn't) deemed acceptable in a Drawstyle.

With opengl we have the multipass option which fixes the z ordering and gets transmapped hair to work fine. Perhaps the daz developers can do that for filament too, if this is the culprit. Let us know.

slighlty off topic, but filament matcaps would be nice. I.e., just plain color matcaps, similar to smooth shaded drawstyle. You can kind of get some good detail/shdadows with the plain opengl and iray uber shader on the smooth shaded drawstyle but it leaves a lot to be desired.  Filament would be better.

DAZ's implementation of Filament is incomplete - you'll likely need to wait until the next major release is out, there has been work done as shown in the changelog. I am one of those users who is hoping that Filament becomes more useful for renders/animations.