Jump to content
Hash, Inc. Forums

SSS and smoothing


itsjustme

Recommended Posts

I'm not sure if anyone else has experienced this, but it seems as though SSS negates smoothing using "averaged normals" or Porcelain (same thing done as a material). Also, "average normals" and Porcelain appear to give slightly different results even though they should be the same. Anyone know how to get around this?

 

Here are some examples (the names of the files denote the settings):

front_without_SSS.png

front_with_skin2_SSS.png

porcelain_no_SSS.png

averaged_normals_no_SSS.png

porcelain_with_skin2_SSS.png

averaged_normals_skin2_SSS.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Hash Fellow

If I were investigating it deeply I'd run the tests in some previous version just to eliminate the possibility that something has gotten out of whack since the features were introduced.

 

Also... when you did "Average Normals," did you set Normal Weight to some value? i seem to recall 50% was the smoothest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I were investigating it deeply I'd run the tests in some previous version just to eliminate the possibility that something has gotten out of whack since the features were introduced.

 

Also... when you did "Average Normals," did you set Normal Weight to some value? i seem to recall 50% was the smoothest.

 

I'll try it in a few other versions...haven't done that yet.

 

I set the "Average Normals" to the same setting as was in the Porcelain material with Jeff's character..."100".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Hash Fellow

Are you referring to the "Average Normals " that is a Surface property?

 

Are we sure that is really the same as Porcelain?

 

In any event, i recall that 50% got me the smoothest result.

 

0% and 100% are opposites of each other , but least smooth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you referring to the "Average Normals " that is a Surface property?

 

Are we sure that is really the same as Porcelain?

 

In any event, i recall that 50% got me the smoothest result.

 

0% and 100% are opposites of each other , but least smooth.

 

Yes, "Average Normals" is a surface property.

 

When I look at Porcelain in v18, it has the same settings in its' surface properties, so I assume they are the same...although it used to be a different "Attribute" type called "Geometry" (I'm not sure when that went away). In v17g+, Porcelain and "Average Normals" gave the same results...in v18g, they were slightly different.

 

I tried a 50% setting on the "Average Normals" and it didn't fix the problem.

 

With "Average Normals" set to 100, the character is smooth until I apply the "skin2" SSS settings (.95, .6, .5), then it is no longer smooth (I tried v18g, v17g+ and v16b). When Jeff Bolle made his model, he used a higher SSS setting (6, 4, 2). The higher setting gives a more waxy appearance (which is fine for an the Alien character) and makes it appear smoother. The "skin1" (1.3, .85, .56) and "skin2" (.95, .6, .5) settings are supposed to be closer to human skin. I used Jeff's model so that there would be a common model that anyone could test on...it's located here (I deleted the maps for my tests to better see the changes between different settings): http://www.hash.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46636&p=399715

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not know that you could 'trick' A:M into showing the 'average normals' feature as far back as V17!!! I have been using SSS and Ave Norms100% and it has been working as I expected it might. Haven't noticed any detriments.

 

What settings are you using on SSS, Matt? On higher settings, there is some smoothing inherent in SSS. "skin1" and "skin2" are supposed to simulate human skin. Most of the settings I've seen being used are much higher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not saying it's the best results... I like to push my settings, until I get in trouble. I will also 'help-out' any SSS by placing a 200% brightness bulb behind the character with a light list only to the character(no specularity or shadows needed.) These settings are just where I was last in the program... I am constantly dinking with these in search of 'holy grail' results. This image utilizes SSS as shown, normal smoothing @100%, and the new fast AO in V18.

tempry.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those are very high "Half extinction distances", which is providing it's own smoothing. "skin1" is (1.3, .85, .56) and "skin2" is (.95, .6, .5) in this post from Yves: http://www.hash.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=25867&p=212206

 

If you were to set the "Half extinction distances" to either "skin1" or "skin2", my guess is that you would find that the "Averaged normals" isn't providing any smoothing with SSS turned on (the smoothing works fine without SSS)...at least that has been my experience over the past couple of weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 3 months later...

I finally got around to rendering a test that I can post showing that smoothing and SSS now work together (it's been fixed for a while). This render is from v18L using "skin2" settings for SSS (0.95, 0.6, 0.5), relative density at "150%" and "Normal weight" set to "85%" The only textures applied are for the iris' and hair maps.

 

 

 

SSS_and_smoothing_05_21_2015.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...