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
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Maybe that's where I saw it. Its definitely you!
I guess I do have a certain style to my renders by now, even though I'm trying for different every now and then. But than its not a bad thing to be recognisable.
I've been taking a look at the G8female and I got some mixed feelings towards her. One big plus side she does take the skins from g3f and SB3 nicely without seams, I didn't try for older or male yet.
The Iray basic skin looks rather ok, but they didn't take care of the 3delight version very much. It looks dull, and they used velvet once again on it instead of fresnel, the eyes have now reflection ( not talking about preset reflection map, but its not dialed in at all) and the Bump map needs adjustment for gamma correction. Everyting things that can be adjusted but its a pity that is was not considered important enough to get it nice for loading up.
The figure has less of a backpain problem than the previous ones and she moves nicely, as well as the expressions are movin better in accord to each other. I am glad the the basic poses coming with her are not all just for pinup.
The clothes from g3f can be autofitted but loose their own boes by that ( which is the same for older generation shifts )
anyways here are some testrenders of her.
edit, to add that I think it somewhat odd, that the eyelashes and eyemoisture are no innate part of the figure but sit on a separate rider. ( eg when you shut the view eye you need to shut them additionally or you get some floating eylashes. Probabyl got a reason, still looks odd to me ;)
Iray, SB3 3delight, 3delight original and SB3 Iray
Maybe they forgot to set the lash conformer to autofollow the eye open/close morphs? There is a fiber lash product for G3 in a rival store *OMG the forum police is coming!*, and it works seamlessly. Haven't yet had the chance to see what's there in the free G8 package, but this looks like a possible explanation.
And that mermaid render is so cool... one splash (splash! hehe) of colour! And the very thing there's an urban mermaid reminded me of one 80s movie... forgot the names of those actors again, but they're kinda famous.
I'm pretty sure the idea was too keep them saparate for some reason, probably even a good one (lalala).
Splash... yes... Daryl Hannah and Tom Hanks and someone else... its been ages since I've seen that one..
As I'm now the owner of Vicky 8 I got to add to my comments above, that the skins for 3dl there are far better ( they still use velvet in unecessary places but the maps are corrected for gamma adjustment) and they look much better. So thanks to the artist there for taking good care of that.
I believe the lashes were separated for easier morphing and importing into other programs for that very idea-making morphs without having to fix the lashes and tears after the fact. This way they both follow the morph on the face without having to fiddle with them.
While I can imagine that to be a good reason wouldn't that be true for other "attachments" to the body as well? But then I'm not a character creator and have little knowlege about that part yet.
Eyes have always been a pain, since people want to reshape the mesh around them without distorting the lashes. Teeth can also be an issue, but they are easier to avoid.
Haven't had a chance to look in the G8F zip yet but I'm curious... Are those conforming lashes transmapped or fibermesh?
Ok, I can see that to be a good reason to at least try a new aproach. We will see if it works out in the long term.
The lashes are transmapped, I guess in the approach to reduce poly numbers on the figure fibremesh would be going the wrong direction, but then with the separation I'm sure there will be be someone making it a fibremesh for them, would be interesting to see.
So here is my first real render with a g8 figure, its https://www.daz3d.com/fwsa-elizabeth-hd-for-victoria-8, and I used the Epic godrays from ThePhilosopher https://www.daz3d.com/epic-props-godrays-volumetric-light-for-iray here which are ... pretty close to a guarantee for an epic render, so very awesome!
This is gorgeous!
Amazing.
Are those weapons in her hands?
That is really nice, Linwelly. Fantastic render.
Thanks everybody!
Yes, she got shuriken prepared to throw
This is driving me crazy and i have no clue what the problem behind this is.
So you remember Mr. Doom whit the eyes a bit glowing:
Now I wnat to use the guy some more and suddenly I got huge problem with tha glow: The rim of the Irisis make stupit blotches of red ( when i activate spectral rendering in all kinds of colours) and they don't resolve when rendring far into the iterations. I've tried moving the light so that he's mostly in shadows again, I deactivated the share glossy input for the Iris and some other things. I do have the suspicion that it started with the Iray update but I can't point my finger on the cause. So if someone has an idea, please help, I want to use this guy again!
Ok, I solved my issue with that, I found that I had the caustics left active, after turning them off everything worked accordingly.
Though now I wonder why the caustics are so crude in the reaction. some testing time needed I guess....
Anybody any thing done with caustics on /off yet? I'd like to know and see the differences
ps. I so relieved I can use that guy again, its ridiculous
Glad you figured it out. I haven't played with caustics at all. Too out of my comfort zone for now. One of these days, maybe.
Not ridiculous at all! I feel that way about my stuff too lol. And no I haven't tried caustics yet, so I will be paying close attention to any testing you might do lol.
Ok, I went and tried to render along and learn something about caustics ( and taking the situation mayby some other dials in the redner settings)
I used a simple pitcher with water which has Iray materials that roughly are representing physical proprieties of the respective materials. I used the sunlight at 15:00 and a simple plane with asphalt shader to place it on
First round is the pticher rendered without caustics and nothing else activated (besides filter for fireflies, render mode is photoreal, tone mapping is untouched)
view is once from the side and once straight against the sunlight direction
next step is caustic sampler on, the difference is easily seen in the light puddle on the ground
for this one I added to put the spectral rendering on first on faithful
and then on natural
here I had the spectral off again but changed the Maximal path length to the maximum of 64
and to 0 ( can anybody tell me why that is set to -1 as the standart setting?)
and in this one everything is on, caustics, spectral on natural and maxpathlength to 64
now i certainly hope that i didn't mix them up at some point, just in case the names of the files below carry what I did, so the interested ones will get the meaning I hope
while I can't see much of the difference between spectral on and of, I do see a difference when the maximal path lenth is on 64 to the -1 as I have the impression, the outer glass layer is better seen without losing its glass appearance.
so more experiences and comments on this one are welcome
So as an afterthought to my red eye blotch problem I see that the light coming from within the eye with caustics on caused some reaction on the inner surfaces of the other eye parts ( thouth turning off eye moisture or other things as a test didn't remove all the blotches. It seems that can not be calculated correctly though I#m still wondering what it turned out the crude way it did.
A bit more art after the theorie, I went back to Mr. Doom, now with glowing eyes without problems and wanted to make a poster style render with fire and ice as colour theme. The godrays are from the philosopher again and I'm still in awe for those. This might be the most reduced background scenery I ever called background as it really contains just that piece of archaic ruins with the steps and the arch, a fireplane ( and one in front to get the red glow on the second sword. And those are the only light sources beside the godrays. the whole thing is in a black cooured sphere becaus i wanted it really dark.
I annoyed my hubby as he commented that his armor is just as useless as the girls fantasy armor, and I replied, that's true and the whole point of it, LOL
So it seems I made a render disciminating males now.. that is a novum for me :)
Great render =) Those fire planes are sweet. Is the snow postworked or part of the product?
In my experience, "-1" may signify the smallest possible limit, possibly the default smallest unit the software can cope with. But I can't vouchsafe Iray and DS use it the same way as other software.
To get correct caustics, you need a closed mesh, with "thickness", so that the normals would be pointing out of the surface (if you could touch them, the whole surface would feel prickly like a hedgehog). With our DAZ figures, the eye moisture has a single layer of polys and the normals of it point outside, towards the viewer. Then you have the cornea which is also a one-layer mesh with the normals pointing the same direction - so the mesh is not closed. So there may be all sorts of artefacts.
Hi Kettu, thanks for the response, I guess that makes sense to me, So the consequence would be, I could try placing a light source inside the glass wall of that pitcher and I might get a similar artefact? Maybe not because that surface is a glass shader, which doesn't need a normal map but I will think of something to try that some more.
About the maximal path length i guess it will be usefull to set that at least to 1 as everything else doesn't make physical sense to me and it obviously makes a difference, at least when it comes to materials like glass, water crystals ( and i guess eyes, something that I should test some more as well).
The snow in the render is part of the product, meant as dust or lint and can be chosen as to how much should be there. In this case it came in handy as snow.
Not sure about light inside a properly closed wall (never tried anything like that), but if you position two pitchers so that their walls intersect, there may be artefacts when another glass "outside surface" starts when still "inside" the first one. The light may be outside, there still may be issues.
*raises a finger* You're about to run into a misconception. Normals are an integral part of _all_ meshes. Whether you perturb them to create an illusion of relief or not (this is what normal and bump maps do), whether you displace them "for real" or not, - they are used by each and every calculation inside the renderer. They show which part is outside and which is inside. There is no other way the renderer can tell this.
This is why one-sided polys (think transmapped hair, DS Optitex dynamic cloth, leaves and flowers on most plant models) are unphysical and may require an extra effort to shade correctly. The "oldschool" solution is just telling the renderer to flip all normals pointing the "wrong" way, but this harbours problems of its own. ...like, when is "wrong" wrong and when is it "right"?
Found a word-of-God source on that -1 max path length in Iray!
www.irayrender.com/fileadmin/filemount/editor/PDF/iray_String_Options_24.pdf
It's a bounce depth kinda thing as it turns out - the pdf also has pictures, but here's a quote:
So "-1" stands for not minimum but maximum here.
Ok, so the normal is always there and is only specially formed with the map ( normal/ bump ... what about displacement? I was of the opinion displacement actually deforms the mesh on a small scale basis, so that would leave the normals unaffectet, meaning they still point in the same direction relative to the surface.) This starts making sense with the fact that the blender tutorial told me to make sure all normals point outside (while there is nothing great to see except the pointers)
Now when I apply a glass shader to a plane, like I would for a window.. is there a side that that should be turned to the camera? Or are those desigend to be two sided shaders?
There are a lot of questions I had with that but I never actually found how to really test stuff like that, for example when I use a two sided shader, lets assume a glass shader to a pitcher like that above there are two "glass surfaces" the light travels through, one on the water side and one on the outside, If those are one sided shaders ok, we have an entrance point and a leaving point but when we use a two sided shader we would have two "thin" lavers of glass and inbetween the "normal stuff" (lets call its air for simplification reasons)
I hit that problem/thought rather early when I tried do make a glass container with water from primitives and wanted to apply refraction to the glass and the water. but as I used one cylinder for the glass the renderer interpreted that as one block of glass ( so one sided shader?)
Those days I faked my way through with applying negative refraction values to the water "block" on the inside, which looked surprisingly close to what one would have expected, but I then failed to put in convincing air bubbles, as I then would have needed again reverse refraction... ( now my head is spinning again)
Thanks for finding this for me, now those are new discoveries. So its not much different from Max Ray trace depth in 3delight, just with the strange habit of flipping the dials over after some threshhold Iray has shown several times already.. Will take a look at that paper as well.
Seems there is more options to play around with settings than a "physical" renderer would make you think.
I keep Max Path Length at 10 which seems to work most of the time. Taking it lower can cause eyes to not render properly as the light bounce doesn't get through all the layers. An example would be ten windows in a line behind each other with a light at one end shining through them. Max Pat Length at 11 would shine through all the windows. Setting it a at 3 and it would only shine through 3 windows and the rest would be dark. It would work the same with two mirrors facing each other with something between them. Set at -1, which is forever I think, you would get an endless number of reflections in each mirror, setting it to 10 would decrease the number of reflections. I know that is how it works in Bryce so I shouldn't think it is any different in Studio although I haven't tried :)
that is how it works with 3delight with max ray trace depth, and from what kettu put up I say its the same yes. Per default I always had it on the max setting, so probably your 10 is a good thing in the middle. Should shorten calculation time after all.
Really well done!
"Traditional" displacement moves the shading point along the normal, yes. Vector displacement can change the direction of the normal and then move the point along. It means you can get complex concave shapes from a simple poly. Check this out - https://mustakettu85.wordpress.com/2016/04/17/vector-displacement-in-ds/ - the ear is formed at render time from a primitive plane.
The normals should point towards the camera. But to get a correct result if your window glass has no thickness, you need an "architectural glass" material without refraction. Otherwise you're looking inside a giant block of glass. In Iray, you have this "thin-walled" switch - enable it for these cases. It should also render faster.
If your window glass is like a flattened cube - it has two sides and both have normals pointing out - then you can use a full refractive shader.
A tip to see bad normals in DS (I think it was J Cade who told me about it): disable "backface lighting" in Preferences-Interface. Then they will always be black in the viewport.
...warning: this may give you a whole new perspective regarding actual quality of many a model, free and paid-for alike.
Refractive shaders aren't really "two-sided". Meshes are. I guess what you're talking about is the concept of interfaces between media. It's an interesting thing indeed. "Negative" I assume you mean negative power, i.e. you divide the surrounding medium IoR by the IoR of the medium inside. It's the right thing to do, but there are extra complications... Take a look at this explanation: http://adaptivesamples.com/2013/10/19/fluid-in-a-glass/
What you'd call a "two-sided" shader is something that could be applied to a one-sided poly to pretend it's not an impossible object. It will shade both sides - maybe even differently based on where the normal is pointing (I think Richard Haseltine published a shader mixer network for that sort of thing years ago) and not just return black when the normal is "wrong".
A similar thing is translucency like the one in UberSurface - even if the normal is "wrong", it will still pick up the light from its other side and display it on the side you see. This creates the illusion of light passing through.
You're welcome! And Iray is not a scientific "light simulator" but a tool to produce images with. And professional tools always need shortcuts. Even LuxRender has shortcuts - "biased" modes, matte materials... you can also have matte materials in Iray. Limiting bounces also introduces a bias.
There's nothing wrong with bias =D
wow, lots of information to digest, but very good information, feels good when some puzzle pieces finally start to fit into the right place and give a bigger image, thanks a lot for that!
that wasn't even meant to sound negative, more like surprised, as coming from the 3delight possibilities to play around, Iray was a useful tool but always felt a bit constricted, so with the growing into the theorie it starts to offer more options again, which I like very much, as to me, no I don't need a lighting simulator but a tool to make my renders look the way I want them ;)