OTOY Forums

These are some of the issues I have faced while using the plugin:

1) Why are all skin materials converted to "diffuse" when they should be "glossy"? Since the plugin doesn't allow saving the materials in the current version, this alone adds quite an amount of extra work when I have to convert ALL skin shaders back to "glossy" just to get started.

2) Why can't I change the material type (diffuse, glossy, specular, etc) straight from the material editor? Why do I have to open the nodes editor just to get a diffuse material set to glossy? If there is a way to do it without having to open a 2nd window, I couldn't find it. Please help.

3) This one is just a suggestion. I couldn't have decent highlights from Genesis' eyes no matter what I've done with the materials, but now I see this is a problem with the figure's lack of an "eyeSurface" geometry. I saw the other thread on this issue, and I found the workarounds too complex for such a common task. Since this is a plugin dedicated to DAZ Studio, I would suggest the inclusion of a material preset specifically meant for Genesis eyes that users could use as a starting point.

4) I find the concept of grouping material nodes that use the same materials together a really good idea. But what is really lacking here is the ability to copy and paste materials without overwriting their texture maps, just replacing all other properties. This is a pretty common and repetitive task that has to be done in basically all scenes when editing figure skin shaders. As a matter of fact, why not also include an option to "paste to ALL skin nodes without overwriting texture maps" in a single batch operation? Since each figure comes with their own material names, why not including an external text file that contains the list of what the plugin should include as a skin node. This way users could customize what they want to be included in this operation.

5) Why is "teeth" grouped together with the mouth interior and tongue? Those always have different shaders in all of my renders. Teeth never has the same properties as tongue, in the same way that lips never have the same shaders as skin.

6) I find it hard to keep the aspect ratio of my images because the plugin doesn't respect the settings when the render window is resized. So whenever I resize it, I have to go back to DS and reset the aspect ratio, which gets unchecked every time (annoying!).

7) I could not find a way to make the render window smaller because it contains a number of GUI controls that limit its minimum size to quite a large size. This makes me believe I cannot actually set the render size to what I want, since the GUI controls will not let me resize it beyond a certain point. For example, I set the render size to 480x640 but the actual render is at 640x786, which is not the size I wanted. This also makes it harder to create a layout with a small preview, since the render window is always so large. It also forces previews to take longer to render. Is there a way to make it smaller?

I have only used the plugin for a day, so those are the issues I have encountered. Any help would be appreciated.

Ken1171 wrote:1) Why are all skin materials converted to "diffuse" when they should be "glossy"? Since the plugin doesn't allow saving the materials in the current version, this alone adds quite an amount of extra work when I have to convert ALL skin shaders back to "glossy" just to get started.

mat conversion is more guessing than science. daz mat settings have nothing suitable apart from the maps what would mean something in octane; i.e. most daz shaders use the default 95% glossiness - so how to translate that into something useful? i don't think that skin is a highly glossy material, but creating glossy materials from the daz settings would create something more looking like paint than skin.

imo a good skin mat would be at least diffuse+sss/glossy mix, so if glossy is better than diffuse is not to decide using mat sets made for poser will usually give you lots of glossy mats, since they are tweaked differently they will look quite bad. means there is no good rule for either the one or the other.

but: select all mats you want to switch in the octane mat tree, right click and select "change type" + what you like to have; will keep settings as possible and maps, but it will not free you from tweaking them to your needs.

Ken1171 wrote:2) Why can't I change the material type (diffuse, glossy, specular, etc) straight from the material editor? Why do I have to open the nodes editor just to get a diffuse material set to glossy? If there is a way to do it without having to open a 2nd window, I couldn't find it. Please help.

see above. apart from that, the mat view in the main tab is only meant to edit values, but not the structure. upcoming features will make more clear why it is this way.

Ken1171 wrote:3) This one is just a suggestion. I couldn't have decent highlights from Genesis' eyes no matter what I've done with the materials, but now I see this is a problem with the figure's lack of an "eyeSurface" geometry. I saw the other thread on this issue, and I found the workarounds too complex for such a common task. Since this is a plugin dedicated to DAZ Studio, I would suggest the inclusion of a material preset specifically meant for Genesis eyes that users could use as a starting point.

material presets and templates will come, sooner or later - when the basics are done. creating fake reflections for eyes is imo not what octane is meant to be, but you only need to edit the surface filter once and are done - not really complicated, isn't it?

apart from that octane needs materials made for octane. creating perfect mats from daz shader settings for all the gazillion sets out there, which are all heavily tweaked for biased 3delight is just impossible. and if the geometry lacks features to create physically correct materials you will need better geometry. using coplanar surfaces is ok for 3delight, but for octane it means you won't ever get a correct glass material.

Ken1171 wrote:4) I find the concept of grouping material nodes that use the same materials together a really good idea. But what is really lacking here is the ability to copy and paste materials without overwriting their texture maps, just replacing all other properties. This is a pretty common and repetitive task that has to be done in basically all scenes when editing figure skin shaders. As a matter of fact, why not also include an option to "paste to ALL skin nodes without overwriting texture maps" in a single batch operation? Since each figure comes with their own material names, why not including an external text file that contains the list of what the plugin should include as a skin node. This way users could customize what they want to be included in this operation.

much more easily written than done, since there are a lot of "what if's", that need to be taken into consideration when pasting settings.

Ken1171 wrote:5) Why is "teeth" grouped together with the mouth interior and tongue? Those always have different shaders in all of my renders. Teeth never has the same properties as tongue, in the same way that lips never have the same shaders as skin.

if the daz mats for teeth and tongue were actually different, they would not be grouped. you can still easily create a new single mat for one of them by right clicking the appropriate entry in the daz tree, and select "create as new".

btw, i too like to create perfect mats for all and any circumstances, it is just beyond what you can do programmatically - given what daz shaders provide and what octane materials need. the best material conversion still happens in your brain which apparently has much more cpu power and much better algorithms than what the plugin can ever have. it will be a matter of the coming months to provide something better in this direction - but the limits are quite obvious.

Ken1171 wrote:6) I find it hard to keep the aspect ratio of my images because the plugin doesn't respect the settings when the render window is resized. So whenever I resize it, I have to go back to DS and reset the aspect ratio, which gets unchecked every time (annoying!).

if rendering with octane you should not tamper with daz render settings. this just messes things up. you have a checkbox in the preferences tab which tells the plugin it should scale to the viewport or if you want to render to a fixed size- using the latter, it will of course use the numbers from the rendersettings tab. you can also right click in the viewport and switch it off there. more explanation about why changing daz render settings messes things up for octane: http://render.otoy.com/forum/viewtopic. ... 94#p131394

one side note: there is a bug in daz which keeps me from setting the aspect constrain to off (in the daz render settings) - just have found out about this. i also have found another way to accomplish this, but until the next update is out, you should have this checkbox unticked when rendering with octane.

Ken1171 wrote:7) I could not find a way to make the render window smaller because it contains a number of GUI controls that limit its minimum size to quite a large size. This makes me believe I cannot actually set the render size to what I want, since the GUI controls will not let me resize it beyond a certain point. For example, I set the render size to 480x640 but the actual render is at 640x786, which is not the size I wanted. This also makes it harder to create a layout with a small preview, since the render window is always so large. It also forces previews to take longer to render. Is there a way to make it smaller?

see above

Ken1171 wrote:I have only used the plugin for a day, so those are the issues I have encountered. Any help would be appreciated.

i hope i could help a little...

(1 and 2) In the plugin conversion, I don't care so much for the initial settings, as long as it starts from an Octane "glossy" shader that includes the texture maps from Poser/DS. The rest I can set up myself.

Here you were saying that if I use Octane glossy materials, things would look more like "paint", but I have to disagree - showing is better than explaining. The attached image is from a render I did 2 months ago in Octane. The skin, clothing, hair, eyes, and even the walls and floor are Octane shaders created from Octane glossy materials.

http://ken1171.deviantart.com/art/Rache ... -355331993

Maybe this is a personal preference, but this has always worked for me in Octane. I use that as a starting point. The conversion (if you ask me) doesn't have to include anything else but a glossy material with the texture maps attached. Leave the rest to me - I just need a better starting point than "diffuse".

(3) As for Genesis eye shaders, I am aware that the figure's eye geometry makes it harder to produce realistic highlights, and that's why I am suggesting a preset. As usual, I will fiddle with it until I find a solution that will work with my pipeline - even if I have to replace Genesis eyes by making my own geometry, but there is a chance most DS users would not go that far.

(4) I am sure it is easier said than done (I am a programmer too), but I am leaving it as a suggestion. I got used to having these features because Reality and Poser Octane plugins both include them, and they certainly speed the work quite a bit because I rarely leave a shader untouched. Especially skin shaders. I am probably not the first asking for this, and not going to be the last.

(5) Even though they share the same texture map, you have already separated the lips from the skin face for the same reasons. My suggestion was to do the same by separating the teeth from the mouth interior and tongue group. If you did it for one, I am sure you can do it for the other. After all, it's for the same reasons. ^___^

(6) Oooh, NOW I understand how this works - thanks for explaining it! I didn't get that from the interface because it was referring to "scaling" the viewport, when I was trying to resize it. You see, in 3D terms, "scaling" and "resizing" are different things, and that's where the confusion came from. But I got it now. ^^

The other checkbox mentions "aspect frame control", while I was looking for "aspect ratio control". On the tooltips, it claims this depended on the "scaling" settings, and I didn't want to mess with scaling, I just wanted to keep aspect ratio when I resized the viewport. It was again a problem with the wording of terms. I am glad this is cleared now.

(7) Thank you, now I know how to handle render sizes. But I still have one little problem. Whenever "AlphaChannel" is ON in the Octane render settings, I cannot see the rendered area boundaries in the render viewport. Perhaps it would be a good idea to include a rectangle frame in that viewport so I can see where the render limits are, like DS does in its own viewport?

Ken1171 wrote:(1 and 2) In the plugin conversion, I don't care so much for the initial settings, as long as it starts from an Octane "glossy" shader that includes the texture maps from Poser/DS. The rest I can set up myself.

then i hope the batch change, which will reduce this to 2 clicks (for all mats at once), is sufficient for the time being. another point is, that the conversion currently needs to produce something that fits for all, be it skin or a brick wall. refining this is work yet to be done.

Ken1171 wrote:(3) As for Genesis eye shaders, I am aware that the figure's eye geometry makes it harder to produce realistic highlights, and that's why I am suggesting a preset. As usual, I will fiddle with it until I find a solution that will work with my pipeline - even if I have to replace Genesis eyes by making my own geometry, but there is a chance most DS users would not go that far.

i have already changed the defaults - but it won't help for new users until the next installer update, which will happen with 1.1 (in a few weeks probably. early adopters bonus )

Ken1171 wrote:(4) I am sure it is easier said than done (I am a programmer too), but I am leaving it as a suggestion. I got used to having these features because Reality and Poser Octane plugins both include them, and they certainly speed the work quite a bit because I rarely leave a shader untouched. Especially skin shaders. I am probably not the first asking for this, and not going to be the last.

you are in fact the first one. i'm not saying that it is not possible, but currently it is just not highest priority.

Ken1171 wrote:(5) Even though they share the same texture map, you have already separated the lips from the skin face for the same reasons. My suggestion was to do the same by separating the teeth from the mouth interior and tongue group. If you did it for one, I am sure you can do it for the other. After all, it's for the same reasons. ^___^

well, i don't really separate things - grouping is based on daz shader settings only; if lips and skin result in two mats, it is because their daz settings and/or maps are different. since you are a programmer: the plugin creates a md5 hash over all daz shader properties. if the hash is the same, mats are grouped. as soon as the plugin gets abilities to create specific pre-tweaked mats for specific surfaces (as discussed in 1+2), this will of course change. currently there is indeed already one exception: the "tear" mat is not created from the daz shader settings, since this resulted in nothing useful for nearly any situation.

since you always can break grouping to your needs, either by creating a new auto material or a new blank mat, directly from the daz surface you want to get out of a group, or by just linking it to a newly created or copied octane material, i think it's still faster than having everything ungrouped

Ken1171 wrote:(6) Oooh, NOW I understand how this works - thanks for explaining it! I didn't get that from the interface because it was referring to "scaling" the viewport, when I was trying to resize it. You see, in 3D terms, "scaling" and "resizing" are different things, and that's where the confusion came from. But I got it now. ^^

glad you got it. in fact i see resizing/scaling also as different things - scaling it makes the ouptut bigger, not only resizes the same amount of pixels it to another new size; if you like to resize the image, try double clicking it when rendering to a fixed size: it will then be resized to the viewport extents (while keeping the ar of course). double clicking again will revert it. btw, mouse wheel zooming and left button panning is also available - while not resized (and not scaled )

Ken1171 wrote:(7) Thank you, now I know how to handle render sizes. But I still have one little problem. Whenever "AlphaChannel" is ON in the Octane render settings, I cannot see the rendered area boundaries in the render viewport. Perhaps it would be a good idea to include a rectangle frame in that viewport so I can see where the render limits are, like DS does in its own viewport?

i see; what about a ps-like checkerboard background for the actual output size? giving it a frame would be another option. it should be possible to include both, and make this an user option so you can set it to your preferences...

Just sticking my oar in here....

Please bear in mind that all these requests are just one users opinion and are based on how one user likes to work. So don't go changing features unless lots of users would prefer it or it makes logical sense. I am more than happy with surfaces coming in as diffuse by default and changing them as I need. I might not like/want the look and feel of another artists work and at the moment the plugin is very user friendly and makes it easy to play with surfacing. If it aint broke - don't fix it

rojharris wrote:If it aint broke - don't fix it

in fact i had already broken it several times when fixing something

apart from that: i see a need to show the render output frame under certain circumstances (when alpha is activated), so this will come (and is rather easy too). pasting settings minus maps is something that sounds useful too, but i of course will not start adding features without thinking about all the possible consequences (what needs some time also). material creation is crucial, and there are already plans for future features, including templating and esp. considering content creators; so if it fits, it will come in one or the other way. but whatever we will see in this area, it will never be a single-click solution fitting everyone's needs, as this is - obviously - just not possible...

linvanchene wrote:What I am currently miss most is to have the option to display the complete scene in the Node Graph Editor and link materials to different surfaces and objects of the same scene.

imo you can do that - you can connect/link any daz surface or any group of daz surfaces to any octane material - or do i misunderstand you? the only difference is that you need to click materials to review the links (shown as dots), since all the cabling isn't shown - but on the other hand it saves precious screen space while still giving direct access to material links; the plugin otherwise would easily take over all screen space that is needed for other daz panes.

and i must say, this won't change anytime soon. my pov is, that the the way how the plugin handles mesh (through daz surfaces) <> material connections/links is faster, provides more options (connect multiple mesh pins with one operation) and gives at least the same oversight and uses much less space - but it is of course different.

linvanchene wrote:Example: I really like how in the standalone one can set up render targets and quickly switch between preview scene and final render setups.

the idea is, that selecting an entry from a dropdown box is still faster than dragging a cable from pin a to pin b, and this is the only difference. you can copy them or create new ones - just like in the standalone (only you can access them faster ). apart from that, environments are handled independent of the rendertarget for obvious reasons (and of course also the cameras).

personally i don't think the plugins should mimic the standalone but rather take up the host way of doing things (as far this is possible).

but more important, hosts like max/maya/softimage/lightwave/... provide their own nodegraph environment already, where octane nodes just get integrated, so the nodegraph look & feel (and handling) is already different amongst all of them. also how rendertarget/render setups are integrated into the host workflow is pretty different as it needs to be part of the render setup workflow of the host (which is also different for all of them). daz studio for example has just nothing suitable for octane in both aspects (nodegraph/render setup), so the plugin needs to provide all that on it's own...

rojharris wrote:Just sticking my oar in here....

Please bear in mind that all these requests are just one users opinion and are based on how one user likes to work. So don't go changing features unless lots of users would prefer it or it makes logical sense. I am more than happy with surfaces coming in as diffuse by default and changing them as I need. I might not like/want the look and feel of another artists work and at the moment the plugin is very user friendly and makes it easy to play with surfacing. If it aint broke - don't fix it

+1