PDA

View Full Version : Realistic Head Hair: Imossible?



Chris Jones
09-16-2015, 08:14 PM
FiberFX hairs can only be textured with nodes, But Self Shadowing doesn't work with nodes. Both of these things are essential for realistic voluminous hair, but I can only have one of them. Furthermore, there is no room left in my scene for a 100k hair mesh.

Any bright ideas, or have I finally reached the end of the road?

(c:

Edit: this was supposed to go in General Support, please move it there if possible.

adk
09-16-2015, 09:22 PM
Any bright ideas, or have I finally reached the end of the road?


For all our sakes I sincerely hope not, and you get a solution to this Chris.

Ernest
09-16-2015, 09:38 PM
Baldness is fashionable!

on the other hand, have you tried Sasquatch? Sure it requires very archaic lighting setups and doesn't work with mirrors, etc. but we've managed to pull very realistic hairdos out of it.

Chris Jones
09-16-2015, 09:48 PM
Baldness is fashionable!

on the other hand, have you tried Sasquatch? Sure it requires very archaic lighting setups and doesn't work with mirrors, etc. but we've managed to pull very realistic hairdos out of it.

Thanks for the suggestion, I did briefly look at Sasquatch recently but couldn't find any way to actually buy it (not that I really have a budget for such things), so I though it must have been discontinued. I can't say I like the sound of those limitations though... what would qualify as an archaic lighting setup?

Ernest
09-16-2015, 09:58 PM
what would qualify as an archaic lighting setup?

The lights that can cast fur and hair shadows for Sasquatch must be spotlights since Sasquatch uses a shadow map.


For me, it's all worth it just due to the fiber rendering. FiberFX's big problem for me is not even the shadowing but the way thick hair gets ...how should I say it... Filtered? Mixed together?

I think Worley does still offer his products. I think Rednova got one by emailing him.

Megalodon2.0
09-16-2015, 10:12 PM
Yeah, it looks like Worley's order page is now gone. Looks like he's pretty much OUT of the Lightwave business. Sad. So many must have and incredible plugins.

Chris Jones
09-16-2015, 10:34 PM
The lights that can cast fur and hair shadows for Sasquatch must be spotlights since Sasquatch uses a shadow map.

Oh ok, I think that might be even more detrimental to the realism of the rest of the scene actually.. :)


FiberFX's big problem for me is not even the shadowing but the way thick hair gets ...how should I say it... Filtered? Mixed together?

I find FFX looks a lot like mesh if the fibers are set to Volume > Solid with raytraced shadows at 200% - but that's where nodes fail with their lack of self shadowing, and create a look that could probably be described as "mixed together".

BokadCastle
09-17-2015, 12:54 AM
...Furthermore, there is no room left in my scene for a 100k hair mesh

Have you tried Core?

Dodgy
09-17-2015, 01:27 AM
FiberFX hairs can only be textured with nodes,

What do you mean? FFX can be textured with T buttons on all the attributes.

But Self Shadowing doesn't work with nodes.

Yes it does. I just tried it, and it works.

What are you trying to do that isn't working? Sounds like something is getting screwed up somewhere....

Chris Jones
09-17-2015, 02:42 AM
Have you tried Core?

Once... ;)


What do you mean? FFX can be textured with T buttons on all the attributes.

That just applies a value from a point on the texture to each hair though (at least it does for me), so with an image map you end up with each hair being a different flat colour rather than having part of the image on it. Nodes also allow access to bump, transparency, refraction etc etc which are not available in the standard attributes.


Yes it does. I just tried it, and it works.

How about with the scene posted here (http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?148041-More-Fiber-Malfunctions)?

Dodgy
09-17-2015, 06:17 AM
That just applies a value from a point on the texture to each hair though (at least it does for me), so with an image map you end up with each hair being a different flat colour rather than having part of the image on it. Nodes also allow access to bump, transparency, refraction etc etc which are not available in the standard attributes.

Ah, so you want that kind of texturing.... I see now. You can use a gradient set to use the V of the fibre, but I'm guessing you want more than that!


How about with the scene posted here (http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?148041-More-Fiber-Malfunctions)?

I've just had a look and it looks like materials don't like shadows. Plugging a texture into the colour input does work with shadows (which is what I tried when you said "Nodes don't cast shadows"), but again I'm guessing you want more! Another bug report to go in...

I think the shadow artefact problems are accuracy related, as scaling the object up seems to cure them. Setting the shadow density to 1000% seems to make them fully opaque too.

Is this for hairs? If you're rendering actual tubes, have you tried the Edge rendering? I'm guessing so?

jboudreau
09-17-2015, 07:13 AM
FiberFX hairs can only be textured with nodes, But Self Shadowing doesn't work with nodes. Both of these things are essential for realistic voluminous hair, but I can only have one of them. Furthermore, there is no room left in my scene for a 100k hair mesh.

Any bright ideas, or have I finally reached the end of the road?

(c:

Edit: this was supposed to go in General Support, please move it there if possible.


Hi

Take a look at this video by Lightwave Guru. It might help


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5udyCnxC6E4

Thanks,
Jason

Chris Jones
09-17-2015, 07:22 AM
Ah, so you want that kind of texturing.... I see now. You can use a gradient set to use the V of the fibre, but I'm guessing you want more than that!

Yep!


I've just had a look and it looks like materials don't like shadows. Plugging a texture into the colour input does work with shadows (which is what I tried when you said "Nodes don't cast shadows"), but again I'm guessing you want more! Another bug report to go in...
I actually discovered the same just moments before I got to this part of your post. :) Material nodes override the main panel settings, and for some reason that also knocks out Self Shadow even though it still appears active. If an image node is plugged straight into color though, the main settings remain active and Self Shadow works - but I still can't get textured fibers because that requires a material node. Hmm...


I think the shadow artefact problems are accuracy related, as scaling the object up seems to cure them. Setting the shadow density to 1000% seems to make them fully opaque too.

Is this for hairs? If you're rendering actual tubes, have you tried the Edge rendering? I'm guessing so?
It's for head hairs, but I'm using Volume Type: Solid so they render as tubes. The scaling is a problem because by the time the fibers are large enough for the artefacts to go away, they're way too fat for normal scale human hair. It's ok at around the default Fiber Width of 500%, but human hair is somewhere under 20% or so. The finer hairs are thin enough to invoke the issues in that other thread (http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?147795-Fiber-Width).

By Edge rendering do you mean Edges in the Object Properties?

Chris Jones
09-17-2015, 07:40 AM
Hi

Take a look at this video by Lightwave Guru. It might help


Thanks, I did actually see that before embarking on my hairy quest, however the pertinent part requires Octane, which sadly I do not possess (in fact I'm not sure if my GPU would even cope with it).

prometheus
09-17-2015, 08:49 AM
Thanks, I did actually see that before embarking on my hairy quest, however the pertinent part requires Octane, which sadly I do not possess (in fact I'm not sure if my GPU would even cope with it).


You did some great showcase stuff that surely helps marketing lightwave, they should offer you a price of a new gpu card and octane bundle, so you can continue your quest for realistic humans without the whole quest going bald.

hope the lightwave team picks that up and look in to ways to help you out, wether it be a price or hint something that they are working on better shadows for fiberfx.

Cheers.

Chris Jones
09-17-2015, 07:16 PM
You did some great showcase stuff that surely helps marketing lightwave, they should offer you a price of a new gpu card and octane bundle, so you can continue your quest for realistic humans without the whole quest going bald.
Actually I'm not sure it would be quite that simple... a new GPU would require my whole PC to be upgraded, and Octane would mean having to redo all my shaders - who knows what new devilry that might unleash!

Julez4001
09-17-2015, 07:34 PM
I hate to sound like a fanboy but Ima' gonna chime in here.
The EXPOSURE you given Lightwave, a sort of ...."see this is still awesome software" flag,
I would think they would pull out many stops to accommodate you especially if meant taking those great images and animations to the next level.

MAUROCOR
09-17-2015, 08:03 PM
I think it is more than time they give us a DECENT hair/fur system. That is an area where there are a lot of people complaing for so long. So many years with this old/bugged/full of crashes system. After each new LW release and all we have is this.
I know there are some few people who can make great work using FFX but the number is nothing compared to the people who canīt. It should be more friendly and work well in all kind of situations.
I myself can get some reasonable results, but always after much effort and a lot of crashes.

Lightwave group, please guys, take a look at this and put it as a priority in your list.

Fiber FX - We deserve better!

leandropedrouzo
09-18-2015, 06:46 AM
I think it is more than time they give us a DECENT hair/fur system. That is an area where there are a lot of people complaing for so long. So many years with this old/bugged/full of crashes system. After each new LW release and all we have is this.
I know there are some few people who can make great work using FFX but the number is nothing compared to the people who canīt. It should be more friendly and work well in all kind of situations.
I myself can get some reasonable results, but always after much effort and a lot of crashes.

Lightwave group, please guys, take a look at this and put it as a priority in your list.

Fiber FX - We deserve better!

Wow! To hear YOU say that... You were THE LW fan!
FiberFX is by far the weakest point of LW, and I've been bitching about it for some years.
It is not usable in production environments, full of bugs, and the final look is still a few steps below what you could achieve with Sasquatch.
I had to do a furry character (I still am) and after some studying mi final choice was geocaching the geometry and exporting it to Maya to use Shave and a Haircut with Arnold. I had to learn Shave and also Arnold. HAD. That was the better choice.
I set a foot on Maya. I don't like it, but there you have choices. You need hair? Maya hair, shave, yeti, xgen. In LW you have to us FFX or not have hair at all.

erikals
09-18-2015, 10:17 AM
hate to say it, but maybe Blender is better...


Fiber FX - We deserve better!
yet another reason why i'm no fan of LightWave 2015
-no new modeler tools
-no integration
-still buggy FiberFX

again, NT knows what Pro users set as Priority 1, they just don't do anything about it... for some reason...
they go for adding Priority 2 stuff...
maybe it's a good strategy, good marketing, maybe they get more Ca$h from new users this way... don't know... http://erikalstad.com/emoti/shrug.gif

Farhad_azer
09-18-2015, 10:47 AM
Wouldn't this be possible via post-processing? one pass with nodes and without shadow and another pass with only shadow (self-shadow) and combining them in compositing package?

erikals
09-18-2015, 10:51 AM
nope, the self-shadow seems to be broken >
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oETvOmGYfLI

you could MDD the animation though, render the hair only in Blender,
then comp it together...

hrgiger
09-18-2015, 12:13 PM
Yeah, I hate to say it but maybe look at rendering in Blender. Its cycles renderer can give some nice results and I've seen some nice examples of hair and fur rendering with it.

bobakabob
09-18-2015, 04:05 PM
After all this time, why is creating hair / fur / fibre in Lightwave still an arcane art? In 2015, it should not have to take good artists with production deadlines weeks of frustration to figure out good fibre / hair settings. There should be editable presets available at the touch of the button and some detailed step by step video tutorials with clearly defined settings as to how to create useable results. Once and for all FiberFX should be a priority for LW3DG and Lightwave updates. LW is a quality program but FiberFX still feels buggy and unfinished.
I abandoned FiberFX recently because of the weird shadows and unpredictable crashes, substituting meshes created in ZBrush which took minutes to create. Please LW3DG, sort this out for 2016.

jeric_synergy
09-18-2015, 04:58 PM
I think it's because whoever is coding FiberFX is not actually USING FiberFX.

I remember at one point asking why there aren't RW measurements in FFX (it was all %s), and I got blown off. But that's like the FIRST FREEKIN' THING a modeler is going to want to specify.

It's b.s.

djwaterman
09-18-2015, 06:33 PM
Shouldn't a fiber just be geometry, like anything else in the scene, not a pixel filter effect? Couldn't a new solution be based on instances of a fiber useing guides as placement. It just seems to me that the FFX hair looks like something not in the scene. I never have used it, it doesn't even show up in VPR. It might be better to just create a new solution.

prometheus
09-18-2015, 06:46 PM
Shouldn't a fiber just be geometry, like anything else in the scene, not a pixel filter effect? Couldn't a new solution be based on instances of a fiber useing guides as placement. It just seems to me that the FFX hair looks like something not in the scene. I never have used it, it doesn't even show up in VPR. It might be better to just create a new solution.

1. why should a fiber be just geometry? itīs there as an alternative instead of adding many polyguides, in some cases that works better, and ..you also add fiber based on weightmaps, you canīt do that with geometry.
2. fiberfx do show in vpr, but only if you use the volume mode in fiberfx render/geometry tab.

we lack..that depth shadow
we lack a more stable fiberfx
we lack good styling and creation tools for both layout and modeler.

other than that..I am not sure if there is to much to complain about? ehh..except all that chris is having issues with. :)

djwaterman
09-18-2015, 08:45 PM
In the shading tab, where does it get it's reflectivity from when I check box the Reflections? I don't want to use specular and as has been stated, if you use nodes you lose self shadowing.


This is the problem, you can't even surface these things correctly so they will never look real.

Luc_Feri
09-19-2015, 07:48 AM
Hi Chris, Have you tried something like this?

Convert the fiber-fx to simple low polygonal mesh. Save this out and reuse this geometry along with your fiber-fx but for shadows only. Simple geometry could also have some dynamics meta-linked with the bullet simulation. Use this layer to render shadows only or put this on a seperate render pass.

Cmon guys FiberFX is a really neat tool!! Modo dynamics would choke on this stuff. You get instant strand-weight maps that work perfectly in bullet. Default settings for stroke, once you get correct fiber width and fiber quantity gives you a really nice first pass with no effort hardly. :D

40% coverage as default tries to replicate 80-100k human hairs, thats why 100% coverage looks like an animal pelt. Watch the LW Gurus videos, he knows, you have to work hard to create human hair, you need layers, 4/5 skull cap regions and vary length and fiber width from thick to fine top down. Styling is much improved in 2015, edit guides is more stable than ever. You can even use fiber-fx edit guides to groom 2 pointpoly chains that you have created either from guides, curves, whatever!! :D

prometheus
09-19-2015, 12:46 PM
Hi Chris, Have you tried something like this?

Convert the fiber-fx to simple low polygonal mesh. Save this out and reuse this geometry along with your fiber-fx but for shadows only. Simple geometry could also have some dynamics meta-linked with the bullet simulation. Use this layer to render shadows only or put this on a seperate render pass.

Cmon guys FiberFX is a really neat tool!! Modo dynamics would choke on this stuff. You get instant strand-weight maps that work perfectly in bullet. Default settings for stroke, once you get correct fiber width and fiber quantity gives you a really nice first pass with no effort hardly. :D

40% coverage as default tries to replicate 80-100k human hairs, thats why 100% coverage looks like an animal pelt. Watch the LW Gurus videos, he knows, you have to work hard to create human hair, you need layers, 4/5 skull cap regions and vary length and fiber width from thick to fine top down. Styling is much improved in 2015, edit guides is more stable than ever. You can even use fiber-fx edit guides to groom 2 pointpoly chains that you have created either from guides, curves, whatever!! :D

Didnīt know there was styling improvements in 2015, will have to check the discovery edition.

Ernest
09-19-2015, 02:31 PM
I think it's because whoever is coding FiberFX is not actually USING FiberFX.

I think it's because whoever is coding FiberFX is not actually CODING FiberFX (99% of the time).

Before it got acquired and the developer was given general LW bug fixing tasks, it was advancing at lightning speed.
Let that be a lesson to all those who ask for 3rd party developers to get hired.



Shouldn't a fiber just be geometry, like anything else in the scene, not a pixel filter effect?
Pixel filters are fast!

jeric_synergy
09-19-2015, 07:52 PM
Well, I kinda loathe the FFX UI, last time I suffered thru it, so I'm not so sanguine about that coder's efforts. (And especially hate its performance at small dimensions. I don't WANT to make my furry animals 30 feet long)

I just wish NewTek, at the time, hadn't pissed off Joe Alter so bad.

leandropedrouzo
09-19-2015, 07:57 PM
Well, I kinda loathe the FFX UI, last time I suffered thru it, so I'm not so sanguine about that coder's efforts. (And especially hate its performance at small dimensions. I don't WANT to make my furry animals 30 feet long)

I just wish NewTek, at the time, hadn't pissed off Joe Alter so bad.

I always remember when I had the chance to play with the Shave 1.0 (alpha I guess) for LW. It was looking good back then...

lightscape
09-19-2015, 08:14 PM
. Styling is much improved in 2015, edit guides is more stable than ever. You can even use fiber-fx edit guides to groom 2 pointpoly chains that you have created either from guides, curves, whatever!! :D

THere's no video covering this for lightwave 2015.

Lino has been doing great adding lots of new videos on lightwave youtube. I hope he makes video for the new updates on 2015 like fiber fx that you mention.

Greenlaw
09-20-2015, 01:36 AM
Well, I kinda loathe the FFX UI, last time I suffered thru it, so I'm not so sanguine about that coder's efforts. (And especially hate its performance at small dimensions. I don't WANT to make my furry animals 30 feet long.

I don't understand this comment. I find the tool works best at actual scale.

G.

Luc_Feri
09-20-2015, 01:50 PM
Prometheus, the main styling improvements I feel are the stability of FFX to go back in and out of edit guides, which is what used to crash a lot at my end. In 11.6 if I went in and out of an edited style set, I could only manage this a few times and i would get crashes.

Lightscape, edit guides and styling not only works on the LW generated guides that use coverage on a surface, but also on your own guides converted to strands created from modeler or zbrush. In fact I'd go as far as to say any 2 point poly chains can be sculpted and groomed even if you weren't using this for a hair model.

About the fiber scale as Greenlaw said, I agree there is no need to have silly scale on models to get a decent look. I'll be honest there is a sweet spot. If you nail the right coverage and density of hair and fiber width the hair looks good.

My emphasis on this FiberFX, hair is a tricky CG aspect, in every software, and most solutions have come from 3rd party plugins. Now I have Octane, I can replicate the way V-Ray Fur works, by using the diffuse texture to drive the fiber colours and that is neat.

As for 2 point poly chains, this is a deadly weapon in LW because of the quickly created strand weights and simplicity of bullet setup, wow some tricks can be had with this combo.

jeric_synergy
09-20-2015, 02:53 PM
I don't understand this comment. I find the tool works best at actual scale.
G.
Perhaps it has changed, but last time I was working on a 'fox' mesh, getting the short hairs on the muzzle, which are very short, ~1mm, was impossible at RW scale for the mesh. To get anything, literally, I had to scale the body size up to 10 meters. --That's a big fox. :) I will say, at 10 meters the FFX looked great. But what a PITA.

Around the same time I did some tests, and it always struck me as weird how there were no absolute lengths, everything was percentages. Quite inconvenient. I hope it's better now.

In general I'm not a big fan of the FFX/Dynamics/Instancer Panels design, they seem quite poor, and have all sorts of weirdness and weaknesses, esp in relation to RMB menus.

I guess I should get that fox mesh out again and see what the current state of the art is.

Chris Jones
09-20-2015, 07:26 PM
Wouldn't this be possible via post-processing? one pass with nodes and without shadow and another pass with only shadow (self-shadow) and combining them in compositing package?and

Convert the fiber-fx to simple low polygonal mesh. Save this out and reuse this geometry along with your fiber-fx but for shadows only. Simple geometry could also have some dynamics meta-linked with the bullet simulation. Use this layer to render shadows only or put this on a seperate render pass.
I could probably make a shadow pass just by turning off nodes, but I wouldn't want to as it won't interact with the SSS of the skin or any refraction etc. As a general rule I try to avoid compositing where possible, just to keep things manageable.


40% coverage as default tries to replicate 80-100k human hairs, thats why 100% coverage looks like an animal pelt.
40% becomes a bit arbitrary though when you're using mesh guides. ;)


Prometheus, the main styling improvements I feel are the stability of FFX to go back in and out of edit guides, which is what used to crash a lot at my end. In 11.6 if I went in and out of an edited style set, I could only manage this a few times and i would get crashes.
Sadly I haven't noticed any difference with Edit Guides in 2015. It must have something to do with the scene, because I still get crashes nearly every time I close the panel. This, along with the limited functionality of Edit Guides and Strand Modeler in particular, is what sent me running to Blender for my styling needs.


If you nail the right coverage and density of hair and fiber width the hair looks good.
That may be so, but to get it looking real needs something extra, like access to nodes (with self shadows).


Perhaps it has changed, but last time I was working on a 'fox' mesh, getting the short hairs on the muzzle, which are very short, ~1mm, was impossible at RW scale for the mesh. To get anything, literally, I had to scale the body size up to 10 meters. --That's a big fox. :) I will say, at 10 meters the FFX looked great. But what a PITA.
That correlates to my findings (around 10x normal scale to remove artefacts and weirdness), but resizing my models/rig would cause all kinds of strife, so that's pretty much out of the question. Why it's not optimised for 1:1, or why the scale should even make a difference at all is beyond me.


Around the same time I did some tests, and it always struck me as weird how there were no absolute lengths, everything was percentages. Quite inconvenient. I hope it's better now.
Still percentages I'm afraid... you have to eyeball everything. I suppose it would be possible to polygonize and measure the mesh in modeler though, providing there's no discrepancy in the conversion.

jeric_synergy
09-20-2015, 08:12 PM
That correlates to my findings (around 10x normal scale to remove artefacts and weirdness), but resizing my models/rig would cause all kinds of strife, so that's pretty much out of the question. Why it's not optimised for 1:1, or why the scale should even make a difference at all is beyond me.
I must say, that makes me feel quite validated, considering your accomplishments. :bowdown:


Still percentages I'm afraid... you have to eyeball everything. I suppose it would be possible to polygonize and measure the mesh in modeler though, providing there's no discrepancy in the conversion.
:devil: What's the point in having more computer power on our desks than the entire world in 1965 if we still have to eyeball things !!!!eleventy!!!! :bangwall: :chicken:

Obviously, Chris, I'm directing this at LW3dG devs, whose job is to make OUR jobs easier. SORT IT OUT! Real World measurements are doable. You guys are supposed to be smart. :devil:

Greenlaw
09-21-2015, 11:03 AM
Perhaps it has changed, but last time I was working on a 'fox' mesh, getting the short hairs on the muzzle, which are very short, ~1mm, was impossible at RW scale for the mesh. To get anything, literally, I had to scale the body size up to 10 meters. --That's a big fox. :) I will say, at 10 meters the FFX looked great. But what a PITA.

That does sound odd.

Here's my experience: Back on DmC, we were using an early version of 11. I used a variety of techniques for guides--mostly used the old reliable old rail cloning method, but also used FiberFX Modeler and even Modo guides. I would have used ZBrush FiberMesh but it had only just come out in beta and I didn't have time to learn and use it back then. (I don't think it was quite LightWave ready yet either.) For the most part, this worked fine. Basically, I found that if I'm using externally modeled guides, the fibers will grow to the length of the fibers by default.

I used Edit Guides for a few background characters. This worked okay but it very problematic that FiberFX stored its vmap data in the .lws; LW3DG addressed this problem shortly after I finished my work the DmC. I think that version was released as 11.5. sp1 or sp2.

I created everything to real world scale on that job. and only saw a problem when I received an .mdd file that was the wrong scale. I kicked it back to the artists doing the dynamics, and when I got it back properly scaled, FiberFX rendered fine.

I think I started the cgi for 'B2' almost a year later when 11.5.1 came out. The cats were not to scale but closer to my own height. It was just easier that way since I was also performing the motion capture. Anyway, I started out using Edit Guides, and was able to comb the fur in about 20 minutes per character. It looked great and I was already to go with it, but then I found it didn't render properly on our home studio farm. This was a BNR 4 issue though because one of the vfx studios around here offered to test my scene for me, and it rendered fine on their farm. I didn't really want to change render controllers at this stage so I decided to go back to modeling my guides without Edit Guides. I wound up using ZBrush FiberMesh for guides, which introduced some new issues that I didn't have to deal with when using Edit Guides, but at least it rendered properly on my farm. I was more or less pleased with the results back then.

It's been about two years since I worked with FiberFX in 11.5.1. In 11.6.x, I ran into motion vector problems with FiberFX so I avoided using it throughout the 11.6.x cycle.

I did some simple tests this summer using Edit Guides in 2015.3 with my render farm (using BNR 6) and it now seems to work correctly here (proper motion vector data too!) I still need to try rendering an actual production scene though. I'll post more on that in the Production Log when I get to it. (Link below.)

So far FiberFX has generally worked out for me and when it hasn't, LW3DG has addressed the issues I've brought up to them. If you run into problems with any part of LightWave, definitely report it. Be sure to send in simplified content that can clearly reproduce the errors on different computers, and include very clear step-by-step instructions, otherwise they really can't understand and fix the problem.

I know some users have posted that they can't use the software and they hate it with a passion, so I try to help by sharing all the tips and tricks I use that make it work for me. Sometimes I feel nobody really wants to hear it though and they would rather keep on complaining about FiberFX (and LightWave in general.) (Not meaning Chris of course, just some users.) :)

G.

Luc_Feri
09-21-2015, 12:51 PM
Chris, of course yeah the 40% is pretty abitrary as a default, just a base starting point for the standard skull cap procedure. ;)

I use guides completely but different layers for each part of the hair. I like many people have the nemesis in CGI hairstyles, but I'm testing and developing methods and creativity to do this and have plenty of WIP tests that are very promising.

Currently the guide radius is to broad, this needs specific axis direction to avoid floating hair if you set the guide radius quite high. This function currently IMO is only useful for small mm settings if you use your own guides and if you use % coverage method then you just get ugly overlaps sometimes. I guess though cluster has enveloped or texture options to be fair.

I do see occasionally people using helmet head skull caps because the topology they used was probably from the head mesh. Helmet head skull caps usually end up with helmet head hair cuts!!! :D

I know styling is far from perfect with edit guides for complex haircuts but I honestly feel 2015 is more stable enough to do routine grooms and that or small adjustments.

Overall for me LW and hair stuff I enjoy far more versus Modo 801 and hair , slooooooowwwwwww, render, sloooooooooww.

I must say Chris we all admire the work you have done greatly and the focus you received. However, you did mentioned the shadows not reacting to the SSS of the skin shader. Aren't you trying to be too accurate here and giving yourself too many headaches??? :D I thought the mantra was if you can't do it fake it, LOL!!

Chris Jones
09-21-2015, 08:36 PM
If you run into problems with any part of LightWave, definitely report it. Be sure to send in simplified content that can clearly reproduce the errors on different computers, and include very clear step-by-step instructions, otherwise they really can't understand and fix the problem.

Don't worry, already on top of it. :thumbsup: Incidentally, what setting are you using for Fiber Width?


However, you did mentioned the shadows not reacting to the SSS of the skin shader. Aren't you trying to be too accurate here and giving yourself too many headaches??? :D I thought the mantra was if you can't do it fake it, LOL!!
My mantra is if you can't do it, don't do it. ;) Sure, if forced I could try comping the shadows and tint them wherever they touch the skin depending on the lighting conditions, but that's an awful lot of extra messing about (and headaches), and I'm still not sure it would look quite as convincing as the "real" thing.

You can never be too accurate when it comes to photoreal humans, and since I'm aiming for a reusable scene and workflow rather than a one-off render, I want it to be as set-and-forget as possible, so as to avoid accumulating an additional mountain of tasks that need to be dealt with in post every time.

(c:

chikega
09-22-2015, 09:54 AM
How about this?

129848129849

https://www.behance.net/gallery/9646597/Human-Hair-3D-Images-by-Lagoa

I know, it's not Lightwave Fiberfx ... but it's a freemium cloud-based renderer. It's fun to mess with the default hair files. Their hair/fur technology is superb.

http://home.lagoa.com

I know .. not helpful at all .. but something for the LWG to aspire to ... or to dishearten :)

erikals
09-22-2015, 12:16 PM
cloud-based... http://www.lies-beuker.nl/gastenboek/img/smilies/bah.gif

looks Great though... http://forums.cgsociety.org/images/smilies/arteest.gif