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
The third image (positive sss with geometry shell) looks best to me.
Very nice. Maybe a little too much translucency on the ears for the image on the right, and something about the eyes for the image on the left seems slightly off.
Actually, I think ears really are that translucent I think when there is a strong light coming fro behind.
Look at Ellen Ripley : )
An unfortunate image : D But the best example I found when googling "ear translucency" : D
You're right. It's hard to get a sense of the intesity of your backlight in absence of some background, as in the image below you can see the intensity of the light playing on the tiled wall behind her.
the reflection on her neck/shoulder does not match the transparency of her ear... it looks as the ear is another material then the rest of the skin... see the shoulder of Ripley does nearly clip to white ... that's why in your render it looks as a very low light does luminate her from behind.. and for that the ear is way to much translucent.
her RIGHT EAR (ripley) has my attention ... because there we see a WHITE light coming trough her ear, blending in dark blue /shadow).. a very small part.. despite the fact that there is lower light then on her left ear... this shows what i mentioned with the difference in scattering (phase) and absorbation are dependent of the angle of view(light)...
and i am not the first person which noted that or want, would like, or could simulate it 
.
and sorry Arnold.. but this is physic
This:
Living 48 years on this planet I've yet never met someone who can see light through a bone. You'd be the very first...
Well, let's say if it doesn't, a certain person at NVIDIA didn't tell the truth about it.
Umm... ...somewhat like that... ...kinda...
"Translucency Weight" is the proportion of transmission layered over diffuse. Similar to the "Opacity" parameter for a Photoshop layer. When Translucency Weight is at 1.00 (equivalent to PS' Opacity 100%), the transmission overblows (kills) the diffuse; and than actually isn't "translucent" anymore. That's why DAZ recommends a value between 0.10 to 0.90 for that paramerter in the Iray Uber documentation.
"Transmitted Color" is the color you get when your volume has the same thickness as your value for "Transmitted Measurement Distance". Objects thicker then TMD will apear darker, objects thinner as that will apear lighter.
Actually, the absorbed color is the result of
1.00 - Transmitted Color value (in linear space; for each channel calculated seperately).
Having a 0.75 in the green Transmitted Color RGB channel and a TMD of 1.0 results in 75% of light passing through, the remaining 25% considered being absorbed, if you volume has a thickness of 1 cm (and, in case of the Iray Uber, your "Translucency Color" is a 1.00, 1.00, 1.00).
OK, got this done before leaving for work. Am I on the right track in creating this new glossy map?
Thanks
Richard
Um... yes. Isn't that what we've been working with here in the last few days? At least that's what I understood.
You should take into account that her ear has certain different thicknessess, it's not uniform for all over her ear.
Also, scattering is curently only monochrone, where it should be in full color, same as transmission; like the absorption coefficient, the scattering coefficient is different for each wavelength. The person I spoke to at NVIDIA said they'll be working on a change, but didn't give an ETA.
Sure, that's where F(90°) comes into play: more light will be reflected, less light will enter the volume, which causes differences on absorption and scattering. Also her ear isn't a plane... and I don't mean "airplane" here.
@ Living 48 years on this planet I've yet never met someone who can see light through a bone. You'd be the very first...
...
well i figured out that when i was 4 or 5 years old - under the blanked with a flashlight - i dont need a formula for that...
Bones ARE TRANSLUCENT too
and if you say NO.. iwill shoot you a image of my pinky against a simple 10 watt led....
translucency weight is transmitted color weight!
translucency color(map) is transmitted color (map)
transmitted color is absorbation color. (edit.. invers)
well NOT kinda... that is how Octane names the parameters correctly. Nothing is confusing and wrong named there.
Ahh...and there it is...a 10W LED can be very bright and not cook you to medium well in the time it takes to make that shot. Most other lights, in order to be bright enough to see anything like that would probably result in a trip to the burn unit.
sunlight is NOT very bright? The assumption that red stops at x.x mm is complete wrong. As i said allready somewhere on page 18 or so - even blue and green travels through a ear..! in normal daylight.
that's why - when we set tmd we should not take skin values.. or it will look like a sheet of skin but not like a face on a volume .
Yes, but sunlight isn't bright enough to show how deep, except on things like ears, it does penetrate. At some depth the 'effects' are overpowered by the amount of 'ambient' light. You, usually, can't isolate a sunlit person from his surroundings well enough to actually see how the skin and light are interacting.
NOT BRIGHT ENOUGH
"You should take into account that her ear has certain different thicknessess, it's not uniform for all over her ear."
you should take into account that absorbation thickness is also based on the angle of light penetration!
@mjc1016 i did not have a 10watt led as i was 5 years old
.. and my pinky was and is still translucent .. but maybe i am more translucent then arnold 
mjc1016 wee see that well in daylight.... it is a part of the final skin color... you dont see ears and finger glowing.. but you can measure it -> example in the shadows!
yep - lt does look now like a glossiness map ... good job
... except the eyebrows should be dark...
translucency of ears and noses: we can also look on my avatar - i am a very translucent human example but not a Albino /but sunburnt in 10 minutes) - my ears are red.. this is token WITHOUT backlight.against a greenscreen (no reflection, very LOW backlight) . two diffuse lights in front and left side of me with a cheap but good dslr. (colormanagment is good).
...OK so where did you get the pic of a test run of the Pele's Wrath solar cannon? I thought that was classified. ;-)
Thanks so much for the feedback. OK. I'll fix the brows when I get home from work.
Yea, from my anglo background I have redish ears too and my eyelids are a bit more red as well.......
My head looks like a giant pink potato. And then the rest of me is more sallow.
Which is one thing that amused me about the comment a bit back about 'her face is a different complection!' well, yeah. ;)
I'll also say, yet again, that I REALLY like Macroskin. It has some of the best skin normal/bump maps anywhere. (The torso comes in 4k and 8k versions, too)
There is a slight mismatch between bump (maybe normal?) textures visible along the face/head seam, but even a little stubble will obscure that.
@timmins.william.. yep you and i seems to have the same skin type ... but where are your ears? fisheye from mobile? or how did you do it ?
...
8k torso bump sounds as this is one of the PA^s which knows what he is doing... i will take a look..
...what about female characters?
..well females usually don't have stubble so how does one hide the seam in this case?
I've been looking at this particular product, but weighing out whether to get it on my tight budget
Oh! I meant stubble on the head, at and above the temples. I've only really noticed it with extreme closeups and hairless noggins. I'd have to test it, but it might be the 'nobrow' face maps specifically, I'm not sure.
A character with a head of hair (or buzzed stubble) looks fine. Been rendering an example for the last 3 hours or so, he should be done soon. ;)