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
© 2025 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
i am to bussy with other stuff for example renders.. but here is a older closeup using what i posted above... (had to cut away the eyes - because one wrong part destroys the whole photorealistic approach) - eyes are really difficult on g3.. or is it just me? g2 eyes did somehow look better
Blended fine bump with original... high glossiness (whitout getting ambient reflections)... flattened bump on nose (control the typical nose highlight)....
I also had to flatten moles and other stuff in the original bump but did not make it perfect, was just a test... a example to illustrate what i posted above..and that with a good bumpmap (or a overworked one) most problems with glossy and shine can get solved and controlled. But well... it is a labor intensive task
Andy, Awhile back you mentioned "sandpaper". I have a pic of actual sand I took. I'm wondering if it might work for the bump map? I would of course need to make it seemless so that it would fill/tile properly then convert to greyscale..
Such a photo might work too....but you need to narrow contrast close to 128.
The goal is to create a fine grain which has it's grey values closer to 128 then the original bump map.... in a bump map grey 128 is zero bump... you want the grain maybe 1/4 - 1/6 of the grey range from the orignal bump map... i use a pattern with greys 110 - 140... or 100 - 156... for a original map with full contrast aka greys 0 - 256...
It is most easy when you have a normal map for your model.... then you can just add the grain pattern to bump while having the pore and wrinkle details in the normal map... then just dial in the grain till you see the effect in scattering and balance bump and normal in a closeup render....
using just a bump map.. 50/50 blending is a good starting point - but you might need to adjust depending on the contrast in your original map.
That what you mean? Horizontal and vertical pattern with RGB 110, 120, 130 and 140.
I guess you merge your special bump and the regular bump in Photoshop. That would mean you'll have to overhaul every single bump map of your figures. Did you try to merge them in DAZ Studios built-in Layered Image Editor? F.e., add new layer, set to Additive Blend and 50% Opacity and set the default bump map to 50% Opacity should IMO work the same as merging them in PS and save it as a new seperate map.
In case of a regular bump replacement (using a normal map) the thing won't even need to set up as large as 4k/8k.
A 4k texture uses 50.331648 Megabyte Video RAM, an 8k even 201.326592 (3 Byte for every texture pixel, if I remember correctly). Since it's a repeating pattern, it would just be easier (and more economic) to tile that damn thing: an 8x8 pixel texture would only use up 0.000192 Megabyte Video RAM and could be tiled with the Image Editor option. 512 by 512 horizontal and vertical tiles should get you the same effect by less RAM eaten up. Every texture is loaded just once into the RAM, regardless of how many times it's been used in a scene.
For figures without a normal map available, wouldn't it be a bit better to make one out of the special bump map?
@Arnold C.
there are two methods mentioned...
Because i work in the bump map anyway some minutes (nose and so on).... all bump textures which i bought are simply messy and need a little bit work in photoshop... there is nothing more easy then just having the grain pattern as a layer in the same file....
I work on own unique custom models and i need all maps in full resolution (aka no tiles)... that's another reason why i did not look into tiles yet.
if you have a normal map -> then tiles in daz bump channel will save memory... you'r right, good suggestion ... but i did not test that - is it possible? .. up to you?
Your screenshot shows "lines" as pattern - you will see geometric repeated patterns as MOIRE in final renders.... i simple set every pixel to another grey next to each other.
and just something else because you mentioned ram...
i bought also made for iray skins ... and all additional maps are simple nonsense... specular, glossy, and some more exotic ones.. they are simple a waste of ram...instead adding microdetails to bump/normal (they are terrible with in baked light)...they pack every possible autogenerated nonsense map in a skin product.
what is needed for photorealism is a high resolution pale diffuse map, a mask for translucency, and high detailed and realistic bump/normal map which cant be done simple from the diffuse...the minimum what can be done to make them better, is adding a fine grain (dosent matter which technic, layered, tiled, or simple baked together in one map - and a clean up, removing all the wrong things which dont belong in a bump!).
As far as i know mesh does not need so much ram then most think (but many 4k maps do so) - low resolution is needed for games with 60fps in realtime - but for sure not when the goal is to render photorealistic human skins. So where are the high detailed displacment maps for Daz characters, or even high res mesh models?
Yeah. I've realized that 99% of the translucency maps and translucency color are a complete waste of time. Like many many just plop Diffuse map in and call it a day, which ... isn't right. At all.
At least translucency you can KIND of do yourself, because 'lighter blob at ears and fingers' isn't hard to do.
But bad bump/normal maps...
well - using the diffuse map in translucency does not really result in a bad render - So here i can't blame PA's because they followed just DAZ example settings...
.
But specular maps with black close to zero and values up to 240 just dosent make any sense... also not in the weight channel..
Glossiness map - the same as above
Roughness maps? well on a skin what is rough has bump.. it would be more or less the same. map,
Bump maps with inbaked light, areas without bump (because of light in the diffuse).. parts which are close to full black others close to white - well.. that's a mess! moles in full black means they never checked their own map dialed in on a closeup!
So - that was my PA rant for today
I was close to give back my last bought product - but on the other side... i know how much time is needed just for a good looking diffuse texture - so the price is still fair... but i expect a bump map which can be used dialed in for a close up and shows the eye wrinkles and details without a mess everywhere else!
Hello AndyGrimm. I am posting only because I have to disagree with you on what a quality spec map looks like.
I think the really dark (close to black) specs are by far the best and hardest to achieve. To my knowledge, only "yannek" and "charlie" have characters with these really dark maps. The darkness of the overall map helps the use fine tune the end result without much impact to the diffuse color. My two cents.
@magnumdaz .... i wont mention products here... because as i said.. the price is fair in my eyes just for a good diffuse texture...
a specular map should show real world specular values for skin..... the range is about 51 - 59.. glossy color white... higher values result in way to "bright" specular, ambient reflectivitiy to low values and nothing is to see.. you said dark map - if your maps are close to the range 51 - 59.. then they are good.. i saw others!
However i am in doubt that a spec map for iray (human skins) are really needed - because the difference between 51 - 59 is not to see on a bump. but out of world values such as > 100 or black zero... are ether metal or alien materials and dont improve a human skin render - nice said
how good are the bump maps of "yannek" and "charlie" products? would you mind to upload a close up which shows the face and strong dialed in bump ? or point me to a render ?
AndyGrimm,
you will forgive me if I don't remember the name of Charlie's product at the moment. Yannek's products were the V4, M4 "elite" textures available on this site.
Here is a link to a render of mine, using M4Rob by yannek. The specular highlights are exaggerated, as well as the gloss settings. However, you should easily be able to see the quality of the bump maps (as well as the contribution of the spec vs. gloss settings.)
http://www.daz3d.com/gallery/#images/95606
wow - yes.. you are right
this is one of the first products i see which is done right - flattened nose bump... highlights correct more or less... nice details...strong bump and nowhere a nonsense mess. If that is "out of the box" this is a good texture!
here is this method on another skin....
image one shows the blended grain with original bump with strength5... i used the eraser tool in photoshop.. set the color to 128 and opacity to 20%... and flattened ugly parts and nose tip in the orginal bump... toke me 5 minutes
Image 2 -> bump strength 10.... all direct reflections are now gone...
Image 3 -> i want the nose more "oily" and the typical round highlight -> eraser tool and flattenend the "GRAIN" bump there a little bit too.....
the whole work toke me not more then 10 minutes...
The images are done with just some iterations and the values a little bit overdone (bumpstrength 10 and glossy 0.9) for demonstration.
No glossiness maps, no specular maps... no top coat.. just the glossy parameter and a working bump map.
@RAMWolff - i also face the same problem with g3 eyes.... tried different parameters... i cant get rid of the problem yet. I am still using 4.8 ? maybe something improved in the Beta?
Here a render from the grain bump test serie above - just changed glossiness to 0.8 ... and rendered longer... had my focus only on nose and cheeks.... lips need some work and yes the eys show strange fireflies in the corner.
I agree you do not necessarily need these spec (gloss/tc) maps, or you should need them only if they are especially designed for the expected result in Iray. This may not be the case of a lot of them... Well so far that's the impression I have. In my converters I always propose the options to keep or remove maps, mentionning that "your should not feel guilty removing spec maps, sometimes results are better without". (Well I say that differently).
Nice to see I'm not the only one ;)
Using bump "smoothing" to adjust local glossiness is an excellent option. Congratulations on this!
I've been following this discussion over the past few days. Though my background is with Octane, I think I can see a couple of things I'm curious about with Iray.
1. I've read that using Maps for translucnecy works correctly in DS 4.9, but it was broken with DS 4.8. So the first thing we need to be certain of is ARE WE ALL USING THE SAME VERSION OF DS?
2. If indeed we are using the same version of DS during this discussion, shouldn't we all be using DS 4.9 at this point in time?
3. Assuming we are all using DS 4.9, then I can say that we might need to totally toss away everything we had been doing with 4.8. Because it is abundantly clear to me, that what is missing from a lot of what I'm seeing here is proper translucency. I suspect that we need to be using image maps for these channels, not uniform colors as we were forced to do in Ds 4.8. More on that in a bit.
Timminis William,
I've probably never replied to you directly before so I've probably never told you how often I look at your avatar for examples of how SSS can look on caucasian skin. That pink sort of nose you have and those rosey cheeks, tells me a ton. And from examples like that I can see how some of the comments you and others have made might be worthy of reconsideration.
1. There should be no need for any sort of Translucency Strength maps that isolate the ears and lips from the rest of the geometry for the purposes of glow. With the proper Translucency settings, ears should properly receive light as well as the nose without over exposing other thicker areas. If you are requiring a separate map to control translucency power, then your Distance and Scale settings are still not correct. In nature there is no difference between the flesh at the ears and other areas, the only difference is the thickness of the fleshy medium.
2. Plopping in a Diffuse map and calling it a day is EXACTLY what we should be doing. Again, I argue that the reason this didnt work as it should have in the past was because of a bug with Iray in DS 4.8. Using 4.9. the maps should be fine.
In Octane, I can use the Diffuse color map for the Translucency Color, and everything is fine. Eyebrows don't get weird red halos, nor does the entire skin image become orange or overly red saturated. But then I've got Medium settings that plausibly absorb and scatter light as expected so I do not need any strenght maps. It is possible to do it incorrectly in Octane as well as I have done in the past, which is why I can see now that I finally got it going right in Octane. Assuming as I do that pretty much any result possible in Octane is also possible in Iray, then using image maps shouldn't be a no-no anymore.
Andy Grimm,
I want to add to the statements you've made about bump vs normal and the need to apply noise filters in order to get a pixelated bump that better mimics reality. I fully agree that there are details missing from even the most detailed maps in the store. To recover some of that lost information and to break up the uniformity of the specular highlights, it is important to have a bump with enough detail to automatically look as it should. I only think the bump aspect needs to be reconsidered. Bump as fas as I can understand, always creates the impression of "depth" by using shading...ie darkened pixels where the bump is subtracted from the diffuse. Where bumps are deep the pixels become fully black removing all diffuse from those given pixels. Normal mapping works by adding highlights as well as shading based on vectors for incoming light direction, and therefore, because it isn't fully subtractive, gives a wider range of possible values and smoother results of topography details. In my opinion, Normal maps outperform bump maps almost 100% of the time. I do not think you need to introduce bump into a situation where normal mapping is already in place. Because as stated, the bump will subtract from the normal highlights. What you actually need, is a single normal map that encompasses all of the information from both the original bump map and the new noise filter you've added to fill in the remainder of the details. One single map... a normal map.
I have included a small portion of a limbs map I've made for Octane. This map has a noise filter added directly to the original bump image. This final composite image is then ported through to a free application that produces Normal maps from typical .bmp,.jpg,.png,.gif type images. I will provide a quick numeric tutorial for how to use it.
I also do not think you ever need maps 8000x8000 pixels, especially for the face. If you were to apply maps that size anywhere it should be the torso and limbs because as it stands now the face is already far higher in resolution than the rest of the body, a huge distraction to me personally everytime I see a super detailed face next to a blurry neck. But even then, 6000x6000 should be fine.
Anyhow, I'm certain even this early on in testing that your results using Normals alone will be superior to those from combining bump with normal mapping.
SS Bump & Normal Generator 5.3
http://ssbump-generator.yolasite.com/
Download this file into any directory you want. It will generate normals for images up to 4096 with no issue. To produce larger images requires advanced settings and cuda support...which you most likely already have.
Fun with Normal Maps!!!!!!
Andy, to come back to what you were saying, I'm finishing a product, which will include both a material converters and a smart skin management tools. The converter first analyses which DS version you have to handle scattering differently and create a different preset depending on the Iray version, and then in the converter you can pick up between caucasian and african skin tone, because scattering management, once again, is not the same. Both for Caucasian and African base, I propose 3 presets, depending on what you want to do of the gloss maps. This image is the african tone version of the "preset 1" (all gloss maps kept), with the scattering settings of "DS 4.9 automatically detected+African skin". Here it works fine with the gloss maps. I'm still making the latest adjustments on the converter so it covers the best all the figures I have (the rest of the tools are ok), so this may not be the final version. The render is helped because Darius skin is of a very good quality.
Rashad very interested comments. I agree with you, ideally, so far, no need for translucency strength maps on a lot of the figures (not all - depending on the geometry), the only remaining issue is the interaction of translucency color and strength, transmitted measurment distance, and transmitted color with SSS amount and scattering measurement distance (+ reflectance tint if you opted for a scatter transmit base mixing), which induces, depending on the geometry sometimes light going through the figure for strong backlights if you want to get a sufficient amount of these on thiner parts of the body. In this cases a translucency strength map may help. Because our figures don't have all the bones and internal absorbing elements that we, human, have. But in most cases, you can avoid that. Yet I think it might be more comfortable sometimes to have some. Exact also, plugging the diffuse color in the translucency color is good for 90% of the skin tones, for the darkest tones it is harder to handle.
Finally it seems that we all agree with the need of maps optimised for Iray, and the importance of the bump maps quality and details to get the best of a skin gloss. Now we are 3 XD!
Would someone please explain what "firefles" are. While I think to see what they are I'll not show my ignorance in pointing out wrong areas.
Sounds like we should all get the 4.9 Beta. I will be doing so shortly.
@Rashad Carter and V3Digitimes...
i did not expect so detailed answers and additonal input and suggestions on my test series... thank you...
I see my method to use a 4k or 8k pattern grain bump overlay as a quick fix to make a poor bump map better .. for the face a 4k map is enough (my demonstration images above use a 4k texture and also a 4k grain pattern... for the torso i am still experimenting but because of BUMP limitation and mesh scale problems (bump and i believe also normals are limited and the scale is mesh dependent in iray)... in short.. i still try to find the same scale of the torso pattern like i use on the face..
... even on a "polished" ball the difference is minimal.... it starts to look wrong above 80 on human skin (even on bump and also on LIPS (i saw many maps where the lips are very bright in specular -> wrong!)... so.. a bad specular map can do more "harm" then improve the final render of a human skin. while a perfect one is not to see 
.
. maybe i am biased from my tests.. but well prove me otherwise then .. all my best results yet dont use top coat.
while hearing 8k the first time it seems overdone but i just say here - if i model micro skin details on a human figure in zbrush or mudbox i need about 20MIO polygons... coming from this point.. 4k for the head or 8k for torso is the LOWER end for such details in a map... (the resolution is to see in extrem closeups AND IN SCATTERED LIGHT also in low resolution renders).... 4k and 8k working for a full body render in 4k hd resolution... as soon as we zoom in..well do the math ...
I use bump because it is the most fast way to fix and work on such details... easy done in any photo editor and 3d painting is not needed (also smoothing i just do it in 2d)... better would be to have a "calculated normal map" from a 20 Mio mesh...because technicaly it is NOT possible to make a correct normal map from a bump map.... converters which do this "CHEAT" a normal map (the scale is messed up because a bump has just "relative scale" (which is limited by the render engine) while a correct normal has a absolut scale and is done from a displacment map -> aka real high res mesh -> to the point: i dont see that a cheated normal looks better then a bump in my renders. both scatter the light and even zoomed in i dont see a difference. talking only about "grain/noise patterns" here - i know well.. that larger details can be shown more correct using a normal map.. while a bump can not do the same
2. I just updated now also to the beta 4.9.... i still have open questions (why does mapping glossines change ambient reflection whitout having infos in the map as example)... i will need to do the same tests again for 4.9....
3. Specular.... even if done right... (in the range of human skin)... the map is a waste of time and ram :-).... simple because microdetails.. change reflections way stronger then every specular color difference ... i dont say i would not use a correct map... but honestly i dont see the difference between 50 and 59 on a bump
4. top coat.... i am still confused how much just switching on top coat /whitout any values) change the colors and contrast on human skin in iray - it does not look right to me... or well-- yes, it looks like a clear vanishing (higher contrast of underlaying details) .. and something like that is simple not on a human skin except for makeup ... it makes the skin look "harder". .. while my goal is to reach the real translucent soft look of skin
@V3Digitimes..."plugging the diffuse color in the translucency color is good for 90% of the skin tones, for the darkest tones it is harder to handle."
that statement helps :-).. because i could not find a answer when to use the diffuse or not in transluscency myself... i just always tought that letting the diffuse texture in the slot does actually looking good too on pale skin ...
If you looking for a betatester when you are ready.. drop me a note...
@Rashad Carter... ok... i will use your suggestion and play with normals also for the "noise" pattern - i will do one or more of the same renders from above using normals.. let's see if there is a difference.. will upload comparing images later today.
Yep, I know... just used the "simpler" one for starters.
That's the difference. I try to develop a "standard" method, a base for all my base figures/characters. "Unique custom models" would be the second step IMO.
I could run some tests using tiling... if I'd understand of what kinda pattern you're talking about.
Maybe you could post a screenshot? Although, I found a little drawback speaking against a simply tiled "special bump" method on your latest test renders. I just picked the last of them, and marked the problem zone: the eyebrows. There's the same "pore" pattern visible where it IMO shouldn't be.
I know you have a slight antipathy about roughness/gloss maps and their usefulness. The reason I came to that method is based on a graphic concerning the different concentration of sebum secretion (see picture below). Breaking glossiness with bump (though I like displacement more, for most of the signifcant features of human skin, pores and wrinkles, go deep instead of high, more holes than hills/more trenches than ridges) is a very good idea, but as a drawback of "bump only" I see a too uniform amount of glossiness over an entire surface, when there should be some differences. Another limit I see are for skin textures including hair/facial hair, like M5's "Phillip" or M6`s hairy "Nevio" textures... and the eyebrows of the entire texture collection. You get the same amount of gloss on a "hairy" surface like on a "bald" one, which doesn't look that right to me. If you take a look on our "Adriana Lima, no makeup" reference photo, her eyebrows don't look very glossy to me.
But I'm nevertheless with you on that specular map trail. 3Delight specular maps doesn't work in Iray, not even on defining strengths: there a black (dark) color means "no/less specular", and a white (light) one "specular". The reason why skin looks that dry/flat in Iray, using 3Delight Specular Maps, is the higher portion of black than white in them.
Four!
I'm ranting for month for iray-optimized maps. 
@arnold
"I know you have a slight antipathy about roughness/gloss maps and their usefulness."
.. but not for maping sebum in the glossiness channel... i just noted some problems with mapping in this channel (strange behavior of ambient reflections - the example is somehwere above in the "ball" renders)... but that problem is maybe solved in 4.9.. i just installed 4.9... that's why i also did not work on the skin tones above (4.8).. if i find the time i will do some better renders tonight where i set the skin tone and other details better.
well - not really a antipathy - ok maybe for the roughness parameter in PBR metal
and yes the render above is done just to show the cheek/nose area .. the used texture above is a merchant product and not finish (to see on the lips and eyebrows)... and yes - eyebrows should be masked in glossiness.
I just experiment and create different patterns right now, blendind also real high resolution skin details for the "noise" map... because i still have some problems with moire.. and i think i can improve that... i will post the map or send it to you as pm - when i am finish...and also the normal map tests are done..
You may try DAZ_cjones' method to set up the shader for your eyes. Additionally you could try and set your sclera's SSS values like this (real-world absorption and scattering measurement, translated to IrayUber values):
SCLERA:
Transmitted Measurement Distance: 0.10
Transmitted Color: (0.962653, 0.901400, 0.758194)
Scattering Measurement Distance: 0.01
SSS Amount: 0.432857
SSS Direction: -0.50
Thanks Andy. I about got the issue under control but I'll try that and see if it improves things further. I am working with the Hivewire figures, not the Genesis line so that may cause further misunderstanding for me with the information that others are offering. The fireflies are just on the Sclera, the setting about the same on the rest of the eye surfaces but because there are deeper colors I'm not seeing anything there like what I'm seeing on the off white of the eyeball!
For the torso a > 16k resolution bump filter to have control down to 1 pixel is needed.. in other words even 8k can break highlights and ambient reflections only to some extent. So here is the limit and that is the case for the ugly seems between face and torso in the bump and glossiness which is to see on so many renders.... a 4k torso map shows 1 pixel details with 4 - 8 pixels in a portrait render... because of the scale limits (bump strenght) is also mesh dependent.. is the bump on the torso always distorted with a 4k map (width and height ratio)...
to make it look nice with real skin details (and using maybe roughness and/or glossiness maps)..6 - 8 k maps (for the torso) are needed. (rashad suggested 6k)... for my own models i think i will go with 8k maps for closeups)...
Fireflies -> setting volume to the sclera made the problem stronger... while it definintly does improve the eyes with more "deep".
4.9... the uploaded image 1 shows the same settings ... skintone and hairs improved a lot... but terrbile fireflies on the sclera - nothing improved here.
the torso shows a 8k grid noise - without underlaying orginal bump - that's why a "pixel grid" can be seen...
@Arnold C.
here is a easy way (you asked a while ago) how you can do T-face glossy maps... the base here is a bump map (you can see also my pixel grid map - just switched off)... curve adjustment for the base gloss color
next simple use the brush tool "large" 400 - 500 pixel and soft... and use a layer for every glossy level.. that way you have full control for later adjustments..
Another way which i recommend if you like to create own textures is Mudbox... there you can simple paint glossy and bump in real time... i started a DAZ gen2 tutorial in this thread http://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/61206/genesis-2-to-mudbox-uvs/p1... and post also in future my mudbox tips there (starting on page 2 i think).. for 10Euro/USD month this is the best investment you can do if you like to improve your texture and modeling skills.
For experimenting with bump filter grids... image 2.... shows a minimalistic (4x4) pattern which works well for glossy control but has a higher risk for moire (better is 8x8.. or if you have patience 128x128 :-)..... simple create a similar pattern and blend it with your orginal bump..because the contrast of your original map is another as mine - i can not just send you my map... you need to balance grid and original with some test renders using your own bump textures.
if your orginal bump has full contrast you can also adjust the orginal bump and flatten the whole layer so that you can use bump strength values between 5 and 10.. this let's you do finer adjustments in DAZ.
@Rashad Carter did not have the time yet to test the map generator (but donwloaded and ready :-) hope to find some hours tomorrow...