Another SSS Test

tungee · Post by **tungee** » Wed Feb 14, 2007 11:56 pm

this is the right way man!
very good.

suvakas · Post by **suvakas** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 12:52 am

What about bump map an SSS? It seems to be somewhat supported, but the uv coordinates are rendered wrong.

Suvakas

OnoSendai wrote:
suvakas wrote:
domparis wrote:Cool head !!
Do u plan to texture it ?

Cheers
Dom
Can we use texture map with SSS material?

Suvakas
not right now...
But it would be useful...
I just have to work out how to do it, probably some kind of local modulation of the absorption coefficients (similar to what Jensen does)

Post by **OnoSendai** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 12:57 am

bump mapping is applied to the material, which is independent of the internal medium. Whether the medium has SSS or not shouldn't affect the UV coords.

Isigrim · Post by **Isigrim** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:44 am

i rendered a new image, mainly to see the shader in detail.
now the absorption is somewhat higher.

(click to see "highres"-version)

now the ear problem is visible a lot better.

Post by **OnoSendai** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:51 am

The problem with the ear is that the scattering coefficients are not high enough, so light can pass straight thru without changing direction.
So increase the scattering coefficients.
Unfortunately this slows down the convergence speed

manitwo · Post by **manitwo** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:00 am

another stunning result isigrim!
i wonder if the ior value of "1" is right?
if someone knows, whats the ior of skin?

Post by **OnoSendai** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:14 am

manitwo wrote:another stunning result isigrim!
i wonder if the ior value of "1" is right?
if someone knows, whats the ior of skin?

Roughly 1.4.

playmesumch00ns · Post by **playmesumch00ns** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:14 am

About 1.4 i think. Greasy water basically

Post by **OnoSendai** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:15 am

playmesumch00ns wrote:About 1.4 i think. Greasy water basically

lol

manitwo · Post by **manitwo** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:19 am

OnoSendai wrote:
manitwo wrote:another stunning result isigrim!
i wonder if the ior value of "1" is right?
if someone knows, whats the ior of skin?
Roughly 1.4.

thanks

Isigrim · Post by **Isigrim** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:28 am

thank you very much for all your help, this is just great.

i am trying to cope with that shader. mainly my idea was the following:
1. try to get the depth and color right (in progress)
2. get the surface working (when no 1 is ok)

no 1 is just possible if i can see clean results, and that´s the point about those renderings. i learned alot about that shader by trying around with an ior of 1.

i will try around with the other params now and post my results

Isigrim · Post by **Isigrim** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 7:09 am

testing a two layer setup. cut out a small part of the face and used it as "testlayer".
will show a better render and the .xml tomorrow

Isigrim · Post by **Isigrim** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 7:41 am

new test, this time a lightning test, to show the colors somehow better.
sorry, didn´t have much time, so i had to stop rendering after short time.
i think i am getting closer.

there is a question though:
when i activate glossy reflection and set ior to 1.4, the material tends to get very dark (even with bright surroundings) why is that? and is there a possibility to control the opacity of the speculars?

manitwo · Post by **manitwo** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 8:08 am

Isigrim wrote:when i activate glossy reflection and set ior to 1.4, the material tends to get very dark (even with bright surroundings) why is that?

same problem here.

Another SSS Test

super

Who is online