Loading...
> >

problem with Orestes Plants (poser) - solved

ISIKOLISIKOL Posts: 386
edited September 2013 in The Commons

i got this product today from Orestes graphics which, besides the problem i have, looks really awesome.

problem is i have this strange artifacts all over the plants....i used with and without the following options but nothing seems to work

idl
smooth at rendering
ambient occlusion at the shaders (default) ant not...

nothing seems to work!!!

any idea from anyone what might causes this?

Untitled.jpg
1000 x 668 - 276K
Post edited by ISIKOL on

Comments

  • M F MM F M Posts: 1,388
    edited September 2013

    Wireframe shows each leaf is a pair of planes, placed very closely together.

    Is there a "welding" setting or tolerance somewhere in there maybe, that's combining the faces together? the result is then bad normals... and consequently your observed effect?

    isikol001b.png
    814 x 763 - 78K
    isikol001a.png
    1024 x 1024 - 892K
    Post edited by M F M on
  • ISIKOLISIKOL Posts: 386
    edited December 1969

    yeah..i wish it looks that good in poser...i will search into it...

    i just made 2 identical renders from reality and poser...

    totally different results...

    weird!!! very weird!!!

    2.jpg
    1984 x 1056 - 2M
  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 102,345
    edited December 1969

    You could try applying a little displacement to the leaves, to separate the layers (assuming their normals point in opposite directions the displacement should pull them apart). I don't know if lowering the shading rate might help Poser to distinguish the planes, given that there is some separation by M F M's screenshot.

  • ISIKOLISIKOL Posts: 386
    edited December 1969

    Richard Haseltine said:
    You could try applying a little displacement to the leaves, to separate the layers (assuming their normals point in opposite directions the displacement should pull them apart). I don't know if lowering the shading rate might help Poser to distinguish the planes, given that there is some separation by M F M's screenshot.

    Richard the minimum shade rate i used was 0,2...

    there a displacement on the shader of 0,2 also....

    still haven't figure this out...:(

  • M F MM F M Posts: 1,388
    edited September 2013

    Which plant is it that you're rendering, Isikol?

    It looks like your leaves are "wrinkly"... none of mine seem to be... <(`.`)... (I'm wondering if maybe you're seeing some extra subdivision going on... which is then changing the geometry of the leaves subtly...).</p>

    Post edited by M F M on
  • FirstBastionFirstBastion Posts: 7,829
    edited September 2013

    It's not really wierd, the biggest problem with Poser is its world scale, which is miniscule when compared to DS, and when planes get too close together is DS they may still be 1 or 2 units apart, but in Poser with the reduction they're literally, fractions of a decimal point apart. The render engine can't differentiate between the planes.

    Post edited by FirstBastion on
  • M F MM F M Posts: 1,388
    edited September 2013

    First pic - cylinder is 1m tall, roughly the height of Bush04B. Second pic... had to shrink the cylinder to 0.10% to get it to be (roughly, by eye) the size of the gap between the leaf planes... which makes them separated by approximately 1mm.

    @ FirstBastion: so... what's the solution then? does Isikol have to render everything scaled up 10x, if he wants to use the plants?

    isikol001d.png
    921 x 921 - 34K
    isikol001c.png
    923 x 923 - 157K
    Post edited by M F M on
  • ISIKOLISIKOL Posts: 386
    edited December 1969

    M F M said:
    First pic - cylinder is 1m tall, roughly the height of Bush04B. Second pic... had to shrink the cylinder to 0.10% to get it to be (roughly, by eye) the size of the gap between the leaf planes... which makes them separated by approximately 1mm.

    @ FirstBastion: so... what's the solution then? does Isikol have to render everything scaled up 10x, if he wants to use the plants?

    If this something of a solution i think i could handle it...im gonna try that but i wish there was a more realistic solution...in DS plants are rendered like a dream... :( and i must have a solution by the end of the day...

  • RawArtRawArt Posts: 5,952
    edited December 1969

    Isikol said:

    If this something of a solution i think i could handle it...im gonna try that but i wish there was a more realistic solution...in DS plants are rendered like a dream... :( and i must have a solution by the end of the day...


    You could always upgrade to using D/S ;) LOL (j/k..I know you love poser...and dont want to change, even though all the cool kids are using d/s now LOL)

    Rawn

  • ISIKOLISIKOL Posts: 386
    edited December 1969

    RawArt said:
    Isikol said:

    If this something of a solution i think i could handle it...im gonna try that but i wish there was a more realistic solution...in DS plants are rendered like a dream... :( and i must have a solution by the end of the day...


    You could always upgrade to using D/S ;) LOL (j/k..I know you love poser...and dont want to change, even though all the cool kids are using d/s now LOL)

    Rawn

    Ron you can't imagine how hard it is for me not to work with genesis 1 and 2 for the quality level they ask me to deliver...

    also its very hard for me to change my workflow with my deadlines....

  • jestmartjestmart Posts: 4,449
    edited December 1969

    The meter measurement doesn't mean anything. Poser can set whatever scale inside the program it wants, it doesn't change the fact that the model is built really small. The following is a few lines of V4 vert coordinates, see how small the values are.

    v 0.07144370 0.34311399 0.00766202
    v 0.06876750 0.32900500 0.00371912
    v 0.06916870 0.33012900 0.00762369
    v 0.06611500 0.31568399 0.00376385
    v 0.06645270 0.31694201 0.00763276

  • OrestesGraphicsOrestesGraphics Posts: 718
    edited December 1969

    Hey there Isikol. Like others said, this is a issue with Poser's renderer. I'd first try to set your min displacement bounds to 1 or even 2, and then set your Shadow Min Bias under your lights higher; increase it to maybe 5 and see if the artifacts disappear, if not, go higher, maybe as high as 10. You can have a look at this guide I made some time ago about overcoming Poser's various rendering errors.

    http://www.orestesgraphics.com/index.php/tutorials/49-poser/84-poser-rendering


    These errors is the result of the displacement mapping on the leaves, not the polygons being close together. Poser likes to do weird things to displacements sometimes. The reason I made them double sided (and yes, normals face outward) was because Poser really made a mess of them when they were your typical single polygon leaves. (Poser doesn't light the back sides of polygons)

  • OrestesGraphicsOrestesGraphics Posts: 718
    edited September 2013

    Ok, just to illustrate, your problem is in fact Min displacement Bounds. First image (bush01_0min) has Min Displacement Bounds (or MDB for Short) at 0. Note jagged shadow terrors, and unshaded areas. Ne second image has MDB set to 1. Issue gone.

    MDB doesn't seem to effect render times any that I could ever tell, so I might be a good idea to set your 'preferred state' render settings to MDB of 2 for whenever you launch Poser, and never have this happen again. And I can't tell you how many times I had to re-render something because I forgot to set MDB before final render; this could fix that too..XD

    (edited to actually add the pictures. Duh..lol)

    bush01_2min.jpg
    712 x 635 - 82K
    bush01_0min.jpg
    712 x 635 - 86K
    Post edited by OrestesGraphics on
  • ISIKOLISIKOL Posts: 386
    edited December 1969

    Orestes Graphics said:
    Ok, just to illustrate, your problem is in fact Min displacement Bounds. First image (bush01_0min) has Min Displacement Bounds (or MDB for Short) at 0. Note jagged shadow terrors, and unshaded areas. Ne second image has MDB set to 1. Issue gone.

    MDB doesn't seem to effect render times any that I could ever tell, so I might be a good idea to set your 'preferred state' render settings to MDB of 2 for whenever you launch Poser, and never have this happen again. And I can't tell you how many times I had to re-render something because I forgot to set MDB before final render; this could fix that too..XD

    (edited to actually add the pictures. Duh..lol)

    thank you so much David! i appreciate it!!!!! :)

  • FirstBastionFirstBastion Posts: 7,829
    edited December 1969

    jestmart said:
    The meter measurement doesn't mean anything. Poser can set whatever scale inside the program it wants, it doesn't change the fact that the model is built really small. The following is a few lines of V4 vert coordinates, see how small the values are.

    v 0.07144370 0.34311399 0.00766202
    v 0.06876750 0.32900500 0.00371912
    v 0.06916870 0.33012900 0.00762369
    v 0.06611500 0.31568399 0.00376385
    v 0.06645270 0.31694201 0.00763276

    but those are not the vert coordinates of V4 when it is loaded into DS.

    The picture below, M4 at zero position loaded into Poser, and Genesis at 100% scale loaded into Poser.
    Poser world scale is miniscule. DS is 3D industry standard.

    comparison.png
    817 x 684 - 141K
  • RawArtRawArt Posts: 5,952
    edited December 1969

    Isikol said:
    RawArt said:
    Isikol said:

    If this something of a solution i think i could handle it...im gonna try that but i wish there was a more realistic solution...in DS plants are rendered like a dream... :( and i must have a solution by the end of the day...


    You could always upgrade to using D/S ;) LOL (j/k..I know you love poser...and dont want to change, even though all the cool kids are using d/s now LOL)

    Rawn

    Ron you can't imagine how hard it is for me not to work with genesis 1 and 2 for the quality level they ask me to deliver...

    also its very hard for me to change my workflow with my deadlines....


    I totally get how hard it is to change work routines. Specially when you are trying to earn a living off of what you do.
    It was kinda hellish for a while when I switched from poser to d/s.
    Specially when I could not get the same looks I was used to in the new program.
    Though now I kinda like the results I get from d/s...but it took a while to like it because it was different than what I expected.

    Rawn

  • Midnight_storiesMidnight_stories Posts: 4,112
    edited December 1969

    Wow the MDB is a huge tip never would have thought of that in a million year has solved some other problems I've had with displacement map.
    Thanks !!!

  • Lissa_xyzLissa_xyz Posts: 6,116
    edited December 1969

    midnight_stories said:
    Wow the MDB is a huge tip never would have thought of that in a million year has solved some other problems I've had with displacement map.
    Thanks !!!

    The rule of thumb from what I've seen is to set MDB to at least the highest displacement value used in the scene. For instance if you have different objects in your scene using say like .2, .6, .8, and 1 as disp values, then you'd set MDB to 1 so that it covers the bases for all.
  • OrestesGraphicsOrestesGraphics Posts: 718
    edited December 1969

    midnight_stories said:
    Wow the MDB is a huge tip never would have thought of that in a million year has solved some other problems I've had with displacement map.
    Thanks !!!

    If you haven't already, check the link I posted earlier. All kinds of tasty nuggets there. lol Been at this as long as I have, I've encountered and manged to overcome about every oddball quirk poser tends to cough up. lol

  • nobody1954nobody1954 Posts: 933
    edited December 1969

    Thanks, Orestes Graphic. Have this item on my future purchases list. (Bought the Gardens of Posidon Bundle today.) I use both Poser and Daz. Very useful information here. I can see why people prefer to only use one. The differences are interesting.

  • jestmartjestmart Posts: 4,449
    edited December 1969

    I will try again. Scale and measurements inside any 3D program are meaningless as the program can use any arbitrary unit scale/measurement it wants. The vertices coordinate example I posted are the distances from 0,0,0 global center. The highest vertex at the the top of V4's head is at only 0.73536 on the y-axis, that is a tiny model. If the raw object file was imported in to DAZ Studio at just 100% scale it would be less than a centimeter tall based on the arbitrary scale/measurement unit Studio uses, but by Poser's scale/measurement unit it would be about 5 feet 9 inches.

  • ISIKOLISIKOL Posts: 386
    edited December 1969

    midnight_stories said:
    Wow the MDB is a huge tip never would have thought of that in a million year has solved some other problems I've had with displacement map.
    Thanks !!!

    Exactly my thoughts! Orestes not only solved the problem but he also gave a tip i have never heard before which is certainly made my day! :)

  • TaozTaoz Posts: 9,971
    edited December 1969

    RawArt said:
    Isikol said:

    If this something of a solution i think i could handle it...im gonna try that but i wish there was a more realistic solution...in DS plants are rendered like a dream... :( and i must have a solution by the end of the day...


    You could always upgrade to using D/S ;) LOL (j/k..I know you love poser...and dont want to change, even though all the cool kids are using d/s now LOL)

    Rawn

    I've been using Poser for several years now and only been playing briefly with DS. But the last couple of weeks I've been working seriously with DS 4.6, and I must say I find it much easier to work with in general, than Poser. The GUI is simply much better designed IMO, which makes the workflow simpler and faster.

Sign In or Register to comment.