3D Scanning Techniques and Workflows

[Infinite]

I thought I would start a thread here about scanning. Scanning on a small'ish budget.

A few days ago I was lucky enough to have into the studio Dawson James, a really talented actor, writter and aspiring film director. Dawson is a british actor and he recently played Greg Mutt, the youtube character created and animated by Paul Smith from Bustykelp.

**EDIT**

Really cool interview with Paul Smith who worked with Dawson on his virtual Dog navvi character, Greg Mutt:

http://www.cgheute.de/2010/05/interview-mit-greg-mutt/ (http://www.cgheute.de/2010/05/interview-mit-greg-mutt/)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQuToiab2uU

Dawson came in to be scanned for Paul's future animation and rigging work.

I used the 3D scanning equipment by DI3D (http://www.di3d.com/index.php) It takes stereo pairs of images to create range maps (depth maps) you can then use the photographs as texture information.

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/Dawson-01.jpg

Raw scan:

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/scan-02.jpg

So I managed to get over 100 FACS scans of Dawson, featuring a range of normal expressions, emotions and isolated movements of his face changes. As well as some really high res texture reference using a Canon 5D Mk II camera.
http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/Dawson-02.jpg

Video Capture of the session:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaAnoGPIYR0

More to come...

www.ir-ltd.net (http://www.ir-ltd.net/home/)

triplegangers® (http://www.triplegangers.com/home/) (3D Scanning service and Digital Captures)

[Neox]

how small is small budget and which system did you use?

i have my own very cheap 3d scanning rig based on flexscan3d, but thanks to canon i cannot sync it for 2 cameras :/

1 cam worked pretty good so far for me, can post some of my results later

[Infinite]

how small is small budget and which system did you use?

i have my own very cheap 3d scanning rig based on flexscan3d, but thanks to canon i cannot sync it for 2 cameras :/

1 cam worked pretty good so far for me, can post some of my results later

Hi Neox,, I used a DI3D system and an Artec-M scanner.

When I say budget I mean in comparison to competing against larger VFX studio who have access to much more sophistacted equipment like, Cyberware PS systems or their own custom built setups. Most of these systems from the research I have done range between £50,000 to £250,000. Custom solutions can be much more.

I had allot less to play with. There is more information on prices available at the DI3D and Artec-Group website.

The Next Engine scanner is quite cheap and seems to produce fairly good results: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EblHQEdm-QM

I'm not sure why you can't sync your Canon cameras? that should be possible. I have used some software before from BreezseSystems that can synchronize upto 16 Canon cameras on one PC, they used it on the Matrix series. The Canon SDK is quite open and versatile as far as I know.

[Neox]

i only have vista or windows7 systems, so if i connect my 2 eos 400d to my pc they get the exact same ID in windows, which for the 3d scanner means, that there is only one cam, so if i shoot it shoots the same camera twice instead of 2 cams. The 1 cam system is a pain in the *** to calibrate. 2 cameras are supposed to be better but i only have eos cams in my surrounding and no matter which i tested its alway the same, windows gives them the same ID and the software can only reach one cam :S

my first scan:

http://www.polyphobia.de/nonpublic/jobs/2009/scans/3dscan_01.jpg


very fast calibrated and therefore pretty bad

gone through meshlab it has some potential

http://www.polyphobia.de/nonpublic/jobs/2009/scans/3dscan_01a.jpg

my second scan, still 1 cam so a lot of dead spaces

http://www.polyphobia.de/nonpublic/jobs/2009/scans/3dscan_02.jpg

i then closed the gaps with zbrush, and projection, the problem then are undercuts but all details stay, pretty decent it even has the cloth structure

http://www.polyphobia.de/nonpublic/jobs/2009/scans/3dscan_02a.jpg

however meshlab has some awesome gap filling tools which are really clever, never thought it would be so good, it loses detail but handles undercuts and overlaps pretty well

http://www.polyphobia.de/nonpublic/jobs/2009/scans/3dscan_02b.jpg

and my last test after a lot of testing, something i could actually use in a production back then

http://www.polyphobia.de/nonpublic/jobs/2009/scans/aermel.jpg

and the system itself is pretty damn cheap if you compare it to any other solution, however, i could never get 2 cameras to work due to the lack of nikons or other systems in my surrounding, so i got kinda lazy with my testing.
From all i've seen so far scanning is pretty much the same, 1 projectionsource (laser or beamer) and 1 or 2 cams campturing the progress, and this is what ich have too, i still hope to get my hands on another cam to test the 2 cam scan method, but well yeah, small hobby and no time, so it kinda sleeps:rolleyes:

http://www.polyphobia.de/public/pictures/Foddos/3dscan.jpg

the problem i saw with nextengines 3d scanner is the very small range it can scan, i planned on using my system for full body clothing scans and faces only on the side, and the system can definitely handle it, i just need to get 2 cams to work >_<

[Infinite]

i only have vista or windows7 systems, so if i connect my 2 eos 400d to my pc they get the exact same ID in windows, which for the 3d scanner means, that there is only one cam, so if i shoot it shoots the same camera twice instead of 2 cams. The 1 cam system is a pain in the *** to calibrate. 2 cameras are supposed to be better but i only have eos cams in my surrounding and no matter which i tested its alway the same, windows gives them the same ID and the software can only reach one cam :S

my first scan:


very fast calibrated and therefore pretty bad

gone through meshlab it has some potential

my second scan, still 1 cam so a lot of dead spaces

i then closed the gaps with zbrush, and projection, the problem then are undercuts but all details stay, pretty decent it even has the cloth structure

however meshlab has some awesome gap filling tools which are really clever, never thought it would be so good, it loses detail but handles undercuts and overlaps pretty well

and my last test after a lot of testing, something i could actually use in a production back then


and the system itself is pretty damn cheap if you compare it to any other solution, however, i could never get 2 cameras to work due to the lack of nikons or other systems in my surrounding, so i got kinda lazy with my testing.
From all i've seen so far scanning is pretty much the same, 1 projectionsource (laser or beamer) and 1 or 2 cams campturing the progress, and this is what ich have too, i still hope to get my hands on another cam to test the 2 cam scan method, but well yeah, small hobby and no time, so it kinda sleeps:rolleyes:


the problem i saw with nextengines 3d scanner is the very small range it can scan, i planned on using my system for full body clothing scans and faces only on the side, and the system can definitely handle it, i just need to get 2 cams to work >_<


Hi Neox, I remember those images when I was doing my own research into 3D scanning, they actually inspired me to look further, I also contemplated a flexscan system for a while.

Those scans are really cool, they pick up cloth well.

Perhaps what you need to do is try it on an XP or Vista platform? maybe think about a dual boot instalation to over come this?

Is Meshlab available to purchase standalone? I would love to see some videos of it in Action. The Artec Group software is really cool for aligning scans together and filling holes.

[Neox]

as said i have 2 400ds i would like to test with something else than canon :D

as for meshlab

its standalone and free to use

http://meshlab.sourceforge.net/

a bit crashy but still an awesome tool to combine scans or fill holes etc.

[Infinite]

as said i have 2 400ds i would like to test with something else than canon :D

as for meshlab

its standalone and free to use

http://meshlab.sourceforge.net/

a bit crashy but still an awesome tool to combine scans or fill holes etc.

Well I highly recommend that dual boot setup ;)

[Infinite]

Here is the first stage of processing.

Load in your generic base head/bust mesh, and the DI3D scan (including colour maps, we will use later) and also the full 360 grey scan from the Artec scanner.

1623

low poly generic control mesh

1620

artec scan

1621

DI3D scan

1622

You can use the DI3D scan as the true reference scale and align up the Artec group scan (this sadly doesnt support real world scale in the software) but both scans match exactly as they are so well callobrated on purchase.

Working with real world point information is invaluable and takes away most of the problems associated with using distorted reference images that contain fov or lens errors as well as any photoshop work that may have been done on the person.

The next stage is to go onto Shape Transfer using DI3D super cool landmark matching software package..

[Infinite]

The next stage is the Shape Transfer in DI3Dview.

Set out your landmarks in DI3Dview:

1627

You set out matching landmark points on both objects that correspond in position to each other. The software can then disort your mesh to match the other object. You have to be careful to keep the point numbering the same.

This technique is great on full body characters but you can end up with over 300 landmarks!

(This allows you to shape match two objects together that have different topology forms. I am amazed Zbrush doesn't have such an outstanding tool built in yet? I am sure you will see this type of tool every where soon. You can use this method on nearly anything!)

Select the areas of your grouped mesh that you want to conform or snap:

1628

press transfer!:

1629

[Infinite]

ZBrush Setup:

Then in ZBrush, go to your highest Subdiv level, in this case 6. Choose your layer you want to use as the character morph:

1630

Goto your lowest layer:

1631

Then import your exported shape transfered mesh from DI3Dview into your lowest level:

1633

(as you can see, this method keeps all your previous sculpture details from your last character project, which is quite handy for this new charaacter, although you will no doubt have to redo allot of the work but it means you can re-use things like eye lid structure, ears and other parts etc. Which all helps to bring the production time down from weeks, to a few days.)

and hey presto! your first stage of the projection process:

1632

(messy but a great blank canvas!)

Next stage, re-projection and cleanup...

[Infinite]

Projection Process:

First stage, using groups set out before hand. Mask off the areas you don't want touched. Make sure you StoreMT on Subdiv Level 06 before you start ; ):

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/ZBC-project-01.jpg

ProjectAll all used on current object with scan visible in background:

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/ZBC-project-02.jpg

First ProjectAll on subdiv 02:

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/ZBC-project-03.jpg

2nd ProjectAll on subdiv 03:

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/ZBC-project-04.jpg

Clean up using Morph brush:

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/ZBC-project-05.jpg

Camparison of Scan and Lowpoly model:

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/ZBC-project-06.jpg

Animation switch, Project layer on/off:

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/project-on-off.gif

Whole process so far? About 30 minutes. Some areas need work, like eyelids and ears, which will need matching to the hidden DI3D scan as well as allot of manual sculpting using reference images captured before hand.

Next stage, cleanup and detail sculpting...

[Infinite]

First stage sculpt.

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/ZBC-sculpt-01-sml.jpg (http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/ZBC-sculpt-01.jpg)

Next step, texture baking from DI3D mesh to lowpolygon model in 3DSMax..

[PascalR]

Great thread, thanks for sharing Lee:thumbsup:

[Infinite]

Great thread, thanks for sharing Lee:thumbsup:

No problems, any chance you could change the title? sorry Pascal :o I put Wok! instead of Work!! :D

[PascalR]

Hehe sure thing , fixed :D

[Infinite]

I came across this today. Even if you have the money to buy a £100K scanner it doesn't always mean you can get good results http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pxb6UW9mSoY

What a waste..

What I would give to get my hands on a Cyberware PS system. Great technology but a bit pricey.

Hehe sure thing , fixed :D

Big thanks!

[Manuel Poehlau]

Great thread, keep on posting :thumbsup:

And nice to read some more infos about the Greg Mutt creators.
I was always wondering, who was responsible for this work.

[Infinite]

Great thread, keep on posting :thumbsup:

And nice to read some more infos about the Greg Mutt creators.
I was always wondering, who was responsible for this work.

Thanks Manuel, Paul Smith the guy behind the rig, has some amazing XSI rigging techniques. He should be sharing some information quite soon I think.

Base colour maps:

Next stage before actual baking of texture information from the scans, I re-use some old colour maps to act as a base.

1641

1642

[Infinite]

Clean up and new textures:

Here's a quick update of the new sculpt details and texture from the DI3D scan:

1643

I used Bodypaint 3D for the texturing, I can't wait for Mari ;) I will psot some screen shots of the baking process later.

Next stage, Mental Ray setup in 3DSMax2009...

[Manuel Poehlau]

Cool stuff!
And I really like the idea of re-using a generic base, which already has some basic scultping but also pore like details already. This can be a huge time safer, even if you resculpt things.

Those scan models are so cool for studying forms.
Most of the shapes and break ups are so subtle, i wouldn´t notice them in a photograph, and for me it´s the hardest part in realistic sculpting. I always tend to simplify and exaggerate forms too much.

[meshmasters]

Is Meshlab available to purchase standalone? I would love to see some videos of it in Action. The Artec Group software is really cool for aligning scans together and filling holes.

Meshlab is freeware. :-)

Cheers,

Joe

[meshmasters]

I'm not sure why you can't sync your Canon cameras? that should be possible.


It's totally possible and I've been doing it for years. I was an early adopter of 3D3 systems technology and I've been working with it for ages. You can certainly sync 2 canon cameras, I do it here all the time. The 3D3 system does take a LONG time to learn how to use properly. I spent at least a year of solid R&D really pushing the limits of the software and at times I wanted to kill myself... LOL. These days I can honestly tell you that I can get some of the highest quality scans possible out of that system, but you have to be willing put in a lot of learning time (sadly, many people give up too soon). I've also developed a lot of proprietary methods to make dealing with the hardware and software more user friendly. Still, I agree the calibration of the system is a pain.

Anyway, I assure you it is possible to link 2 canon cameras with the 3D3 systems software, provided that your particular Canon camera(s) are supported.

Don't give up!

Cheers,

Joe

[Infinite]

Hey Joe, great to see you posting on here. I think Neox was having issues because of his operating system. I haven't had issues with multiple Canons, wel l I used to with Vista as Canons SDK didnt support Vista until recently (about a year ago now)so I would imagine that could be the issue Neox is facing with Windows 7. My 9 Canons synch fine with XP and Vista (now) using Breeze Systems software.

Dimensional Imaging have only recently got access to update their software for their DI3D system to work with Vista 64bit.

Cool stuff!
And I really like the idea of re-using a generic base, which already has some basic scultping but also pore like details already. This can be a huge time safer, even if you resculpt things.

Those scan models are so cool for studying forms.
Most of the shapes and break ups are so subtle, i wouldn´t notice them in a photograph, and for me it´s the hardest part in realistic sculpting. I always tend to simplify and exaggerate forms too much.

Hey Manuel, yeah it's a real time saver and actualy makes the whole process gerat fun to do, as you can see your old work constantly improve, change form and adapt.

Here's another update, I just reused the shader from the last guy I did here that had darker skin and swapped the colour maps. This was the first batch of renders. It just shows how quick the process is, about 8 hours of work on and off.

1644

Next stage, fine details (eyebrows, skin fuzz, stubble and hair) and some other lighting setups to stress test the caucasian version of the shader...

[PascalR]

wow great workflow, your result is quite stunning for a 8h work:notWorthy:
Well done!

[Infinite]

wow great workflow, your result is quite stunning for a 8h work:notWorthy:
Well done!

Thanks Pascal, more to come.. The expressions are the fun part! :sw:

[meshmasters]

Hey Joe, great to see you posting on here. I think Neox was having issues because of his operating system. I haven't had issues with multiple Canons, wel l I used to with Vista as Canons SDK didnt support Vista until recently (about a year ago now)so I would imagine that could be the issue Neox is facing with Windows 7. My 9 Canons synch fine with XP and Vista (now) using Breeze Systems software.


Ahhh, I see. Yes, you are quite right, it could be due to driver incompatibility with the OS. I do have a 3D3 system set up at the moment that is running a stereo camera setup on Win7 64 bit. However, in this case I am not using the Canon's rather I'm using a stereo pair of uEye's machine vision video cameras. Come to think of it, I've not tried running a stereo pair of Canon's on Win7, so perhaps there is a compatibility issue. Actually, it would not surprise me if that were the case Canon does seem to take a long time to update their drivers. That said, overall I actually prefer using machine vision cameras with the 3D3 system, rather than using still cameras. Yes, still cameras will provide a higher quality image (in most cases) but the machine vision cameras are much faster, so it's a speed vs quality trade-off. If you are attempting to scan humans with a 3D3 system then speed will be your biggest issue. IMHO the 3D3 system is more suited to inanimate objects. Working with human subjects and the 3D3 system is somewhat difficult because of it's somewhat slow acquisition speed. That said, they have improved the speed a lot from what it was but I still think it's not the best choice for scanning humans. Where the system really shines is with still objects...you can obtain crazy HD quality, but the scan times will long.

Cheers,

Joe

[Infinite]

Ahhh, I see. Yes, you are quite right, it could be due to driver incompatibility with the OS. I do have a 3D3 system set up at the moment that is running a stereo camera setup on Win7 64 bit. However, in this case I am not using the Canon's rather I'm using a stereo pair of uEye's machine vision video cameras. Come to think of it, I've not tried running a stereo pair of Canon's on Win7, so perhaps there is a compatibility issue. Actually, it would not surprise me if that were the case Canon does seem to take a long time to update their drivers. That said, overall I actually prefer using machine vision cameras with the 3D3 system, rather than using still cameras. Yes, still cameras will provide a higher quality image (in most cases) but the machine vision cameras are much faster, so it's a speed vs quality trade-off. If you are attempting to scan humans with a 3D3 system then speed will be your biggest issue. IMHO the 3D3 system is more suited to inanimate objects. Working with human subjects and the 3D3 system is somewhat difficult because of it's somewhat slow acquisition speed. That said, they have improved the speed a lot from what it was but I still think it's not the best choice for scanning humans. Where the system really shines is with still objects...you can obtain crazy HD quality, but the scan times will long.

Cheers,

Joe

It would be great to see what these machine vision cameras can do, I belive the DI4D system might use them? but I am not sure. Also it would be great to get a glimpse of your 3D3 setup, asking allot I know :drool:

[Bigguns]

Hey Lee that really nice workflow! more complicated then I though it was but it's kinda fast and great awesome result.. in 8 hours! I would love to have a scenner too, it's really nice to learn the volumes even more.

Anyway, keep it up and do some Vray version too :) or send me the head and I do a vray test :)

[Infinite]

Thanks Bigguns, I will send over the mesh to you later. Just get me on MSN.

Another test update from yestarday. The flash shot, isn't so great.

1651

1652

1653

Expression tests to come today..

[Infinite]

Dawson's 'tripleganger' is getting closer to completion.

A quick test with hair, stubble and eyebrows before the expressions are setup. All made in Hair-Farm, over 1.5 million hairs, rendered in about 1 minute per frame:

1654

(I will post some screen shots of the hair creation process soon.)

Expressions next..

[Neox]

Anyway, I assure you it is possible to link 2 canon cameras with the 3D3 systems software, provided that your particular Canon camera(s) are supported.


i know it SHOULD be possible, though on my vista and windows 7 systems it is not i don't have xp licence floating around so i cannot test it on an xp system, the cameras are simply eos 400 d s and they are supported as far as i know :)
but it doesn't help me, on my machine i only have either one or the other camera ID in flexscan, depending on which cam i plugged in first and so the software recognizes 2 cams with the same ID and therefore only shoots twice with 1 cam as opposed to shoot one time per cam

ah and before i forget it again... very nice work, definitely makes me think to start my tests again :)

[Infinite]

i know it SHOULD be possible, though on my vista and windows 7 systems it is not i don't have xp licence floating around so i cannot test it on an xp system, the cameras are simply eos 400 d s and they are supported as far as i know :)
but it doesn't help me, on my machine i only have either one or the other camera ID in flexscan, depending on which cam i plugged in first and so the software recognizes 2 cams with the same ID and therefore only shoots twice with 1 cam as opposed to shoot one time per cam

ah and before i forget it again... very nice work, definitely makes me think to start my tests again :)

Hi Neox, perhaps it could be a bug of the Flexscan software? I wish I could help in someway, as that must be frustrating. Thanks for your comments.

Here's some screen grabs of one of the previous posts, baking the texture from DI3D scan to my low res mesh using Textureing Baking in 3DSMax. You can do the same thing in ZBrush but you are limited to the resolution of polypainting, which sadly doesn't cut it.

Texture baking settings. Most 3d apps have this I think.

1658

DI3D scan and low oply model ontop of each other. The lowpoly model has a displacement map applied, to match the high res scan. The DI3D model has the texture scan applied to it. This is what we need to extrapolate.

1655

Side by side and you can see the ray bake control mesh, which you can control.

1656

The final bake. It's dirty and messy but you can acquire some quite useful high resolution accurate information from it. As you can see it has been baked to my models UV layout.

1657

[Infinite]

3 shots with hair and peach fuzz layers:

1659

[Neox]

definitely a workflow worth trying out!
however i can't find any data about the pricing of any di3d software, is there any reseller around where i can get more information about their tools?

[meshmasters]

i know it SHOULD be possible, though on my vista and windows 7 systems it is not i don't have xp licence floating around so i cannot test it on an xp system, the cameras are simply eos 400 d s and they are supported as far as i know :)
but it doesn't help me, on my machine i only have either one or the other camera ID in flexscan, depending on which cam i plugged in first and so the software recognizes 2 cams with the same ID and therefore only shoots twice with 1 cam as opposed to shoot one time per cam

ah and before i forget it again... very nice work, definitely makes me think to start my tests again :)


Hello Neox,

Sorry to hear about all the trouble you are having with this. I don't doubt what you say is true and stuff like this can be so annoying.

Tell you what, as soon as I get a chance I will run some tests with FS3D running on my Win7 machine. I'll see if I can manage to get a stereo pair of Canon's to work properly or not.

I let you know what I learn.

Cheers,

Joe

[meshmasters]

Lee,

So I take it that the images that you are using to bake onto the mesh are the colour images from your DI3D rig? Yes?

I'm just guessing but given that the subject is sitting in the center of the frame are those images at about 45 either side of center?

If that's the case, would that not mean that you get a seam running down the center of the face when reprojected?

Just curious?

Cheers,

Joe

[Infinite]

definitely a workflow worth trying out!
However I can't find any data about the pricing of any di3d software, is there any reseller around where I can get more information about their tools?

Neox send me an email to admin "at" ir-ltd.net and I can get you some DI3D pricing information, or I would be able to at least give you the email information of someone there to talk to.

Lee,

So I take it that the images that you are using to bake onto the mesh are the colour images from your DI3D rig? Yes?

Joe


Hi Joe, yes correct.



I'm just guessing but given that the subject is sitting in the center of the frame are those images at about 45 either side of center?

If that's the case, would that not mean that you get a seam running down the center of the face when reprojected?

Just curious?

Cheers,

Joe

Yes and No. Well there is sometimes a faint seem. But as you can see from the captured data that has been baked, it's very scrappy anyway. You have to apply allot of manual clean up, hand painting and sculpting. It's a great base to work with though. I am in talks with the company about upgrading the system to feature cameras at the front and some at the sides, to over come this. It isn't really an issue though :)

[Infinite]

Time to pick and choose some expressions to work with. I think these might work well as some test material:

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/Dawson_008.jpg

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/Dawson_019.jpg

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/Dawson_069.jpg

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/Dawson_071.jpg

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/Dawson_072.jpg

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/cgfeedback/dawson/Dawson_076.jpg

The next step is to workcareful with the layers in Zbrush to match to these expression scans.

Expressions next..

[meshmasters]

Hi Joe, yes correct.

Yes and No. Well there is sometimes a faint seem. But as you can see from the captured data that has been baked, it's very scrappy anyway. You have to apply allot of manual clean up, hand painting and sculpting. It's a great base to work with though. I am in talks with the company about upgrading the system to feature cameras at the front and some at the sides, to over come this. It isn't really an issue though :)

Ok, sure makes perfect sense. Just to be clear, I was not trying to imply that there were any problematic issues involved with this. As a matter of fact, this is exactly how my 3DMD scanner deals with mapping & projection and it's exactly how I work as well.

Cheers,

Joe

[Infinite]

Ok, sure makes perfect sense. Just to be clear, I was not trying to imply that there were any problematic issues involved with this. As a matter of fact, this is exactly how my 3DMD scanner deals with mapping & projection and it's exactly how I work as well.

Cheers,

Joe

Hey Joe, yes I know :) it was taken as so, I was just mentioning the fact that results need work. I can't wait for the day of a complete automated process but then we would be out of work!! :rofl:

Again I can't wait to see your pipeline and research results. I am really looking forward to sharing ideas with you in some capacity. :thumbsup: all your previous support, encouragement and ideas have really helped me move forward this year. Most appreciated!

[migusan76]

Great thread Lee! Thanks for sharing clap

[Infinite]

migusan76: No problem, I hope it helps in some way.

Thanks for the plug Pascal! :thumbsup: shame to see the other thread go :(

[PascalR]

No worries Lee, your thread was on my top row list anyways ;)

[Infinite]

First expression test,

Smile.

I am not happy with his Left side for some reason, I think it is the shape of the skull, I need to tweak it.

1666

More to come...

[Infinite]

and another, an awesome expression! Sorry Dawson! :rofl:

1667

[Intervain]

cool stuff Lee - an interesting read!

[collings]

great expression man, the second one is especially cool. The smile looks somehow a bit static not very natural if you know what i mean. but great nonetheless :)

[Infinite]

Intervain: I hope some of these points may be useful in the future :)

collings: Thanks. I know what you mean, the smile was actually quite staged so it didn't look natural in real life really, but the sculpt does need more work.

Last expression for the night. The inside of his mouth only has place holder textures, the gums are really unfinished.

Screech!:

1670

[tiktok]

Some great work here lee! very cool to see your workflow :sw:

-bayard

[madmatt]

I was missing this thread...

Great to see your workflow really interesting, there's a lot of work behind.

P.S.: thanx indeed to share with us who was behind my new myth "Greg Mutt" :D
I was trying to find some Infos about his creator without success...

[Kemono]

Wow, your really getting some awesome results in minimal time!
Do you paint any custom subdermal / specular maps, or you do you try to grab that from the color map that is scanned?

Fantastic thread!

[Infinite]

Kemono: Hi, no I try to keep everything to a minimum, well enough that I can get away with. I see many artists create multiple maps, loads of them, epi, sub, ss weight etc. When you don't really need them all that much and for speed it is just easier to use a few maps, but all characters and projects have different needs.

Currenty this guy uses Colour, Specular, Bump, Displacement, Gloss, Bacscatter Weight and that's it. The rest are controlled by procedural effects or colour slots.

tiktok: Thanks for commenting Bayard :)

madmatt: Thanks, at the start of the thread there is a link to how Greg Mutt was made by Bustykelp :thumbsup:

[piek]

Thanks for taking the time and trouble to compile this Lee, very generous and very informative.

[Infinite]

Thanks Piek :)

For anyone who may be interested, here is a direct comparison between MR and Vray. I still prefer MR's shader, as it is much faster than Vray and cleary has far greater Epidermis control where Vray is lacking in this area. It's pretty evident on the skin, as MR is able to eat in some of the light into the skins top layer, producing a lovely wax/skin effect.

This is a using an identical setup to Luc Begin's shader (although I am not able to wield it as well as Luc and the other Vray guru's here)

Mental Ray

1688

VRay

1689

Feel free to download the images, I recommend you flip between them in some kind of application. I use ACDSee 10. A superb image management program, has been since '98!

Any comments are most welcome.

[ZippZopp]

thanks for those comparison shots, really interesting to look at and analyze. you're right on that it looks like mental ray shader gives a little bit more control...are there attributes that the vray shader has over the MR one?

[MikeN]

Looking sweet Lee.
Are you using Overall diffuse map with vrayfastsss2 ?
Looks like your diffuse is being washed away into your sss effects.
My setup for vraysss2
1692

[ZippZopp]

one quick question for you about your mental ray setup. are you comping reflection in or are you using the reflection settings built into the shader. every attempt i've done with the reflection on the SSS shader results in a really noisy reflection, even with a blurred hdr file.

[Bigguns]

That is not a good comparaison to me, Lee you had some setting not like mine, it's why it do not look better then the mr one and your sss is not strong enought it's why we feel it less.

I guess your next post with vray will be better ;)

I'm doing a convertion over mr of my character, it's sure it will be worse then my vray one ;l.

[Infinite]

Looking sweet Lee.
Are you using Overall diffuse map with vrayfastsss2 ?
Looks like your diffuse is being washed away into your sss effects.
My setup for vraysss2
1692

Hi Mike, thanks for posting. I managed to get Luc to help me out this one. Thanks for your tips though, I had my settings wrongly setup apparently. Vray is a beast!

thanks for those comparison shots, really interesting to look at and analyze. you're right on that it looks like mental ray shader gives a little bit more control...are there attributes that the vray shader has over the MR one?

Hey ZippZopp: I think Vray lacks allot with Epidermis control, as there are none but Luc, Manuel and Vimmy are the best to ask, they have got the best posted results so far.

one quick question for you about your mental ray setup. are you comping reflection in or are you using the reflection settings built into the shader. every attempt i've done with the reflection on the SSS shader results in a really noisy reflection, even with a blurred hdr file.

Hi, I always prefer to just render one image pass on characters. I know some artists render out dozens and dozens of layers then composite, even some VFX studios but I have yet to see great results from that process. I don't do anything special in MR but this is just for stills, I can almost guarentee if I was to render I would get fizzing and splotching happen.

Bigguns: Yeah thanks Luc.

[meshmasters]

What we need is a complete and comprehensive end-to-end vray tutorial for human character creation aimed at us mere mortals.

I'm really keen to learn more about rendering realistic characters with vray.

Any of your experts care to create one? I for one would be more than happy to purchase such a thing :thumbsup:

Cheers,

Joe

[Infinite]

What we need is a complete and comprehensive end-to-end vray tutorial for human character creation aimed at us mere mortals.

I'm really keen to learn more about rendering realistic characters with vray.

Any of your experts care to create one? I for one would be more than happy to purchase such a thing :thumbsup:

Cheers,

Joe

Hey Joe, I think Luc and Vimmy are the guys to push about that. I know part of the process but I am swarn to secrecy which I hate, as I share everything. Luc helped me allot but I don't think he wants to share the ideas, which is kind of understandable. Although I bet in the next 3-6 months tips and workflows will slowly leak out, as I see other artists here have learnt how to do it over time like Manuel and Mike Nash.

I would be more than happy to share my Skin settings with MR but those are already available on the models I sell.

[meshmasters]

Hey Joe, I think Luc and Vimmy are the guys to push about that. I know part of the process but I am swarn to secrecy which I hate, as I share everything. Luc helped me allot but I don't think he wants to share the ideas, which is kind of understandable. Although I bet in the next 3-6 months tips and workflows will slowly leak out, as I see other artists here have learnt how to do it over time like Manuel and Mike Nash.

I would be more than happy to share my Skin settings with MR but those are already available on the models I sell.


Understood but very disappointing nevertheless.

My own personal issue is that I know how to render realistic characters with mental ray... but I know nothing about about working in vray (although I'm very keen to learn). However, if no one sees fit to share it looks like this trend will continue on into the future - sigh :-/

As I said, most discouraging.

Oh well, I hate having to reinvent the wheel but then again, I'm capable of doing my own R&D. Besides, nothing in CG stays a "secret" for long anyway.

Back to the drawing board then.

Cheers,

Joe

[Infinite]

Understood but very disappointing nevertheless.

My own personal issue is that I know how to render realistic characters with mental ray... but I know nothing about about working in vray (although I'm very keen to learn). However, if no one sees fit to share it looks like this trend will continue on into the future - sigh :-/

As I said, most discouraging.

Oh well, I hate having to reinvent the wheel but then again, I'm capable of doing my own R&D. Besides, nothing in CG stays a "secret" for long anyway.

Back to the drawing board then.

Cheers,

Joe

As I say, normally I would share, as I share everything I can, always have but when something has been passed down from someone who has spent hours, days, weeks, months, testing and testing their own setup, which no-one had really done with Vray SSS2 before. I can't then just hand over Luc's settings without Luc's consent but perhaps if you contact Luc directly Joe, and work with him somehow :beerchug: I am sure he would be more than happy to help you. I have Luc's email, contact me offline and I can send it to you or you can get in touch with him here. He's a cool guy! :thumbsup:

I hope that helps. Honestly I think Vray is an utter pain in the arse to start with, once you get over a few hurdles it becomes more bareable. Still quite slow to render though IMHO.

..but as you can see from Luc's final results, it can look much better than anything else on the market, even any past renders from other artists dare I say it :sw:

[meshmasters]

As I say, normally I would share, as I share everything I can, always have but when something has been passed down from someone who has spent hours, days, weeks, months, testing and testing their own setup, which no-one had really done with Vray SSS2 before.

Hey, I totally understand.


I can't then just hand over the settings for nothing

Just to be clear, I was not asking you or anyone else to do that. I simply suggested that it would be nice if someone who is an expert at working with vray took the time to share this knowledge with others but if they want to hold this stuff back, fair enough, who am I to argue, I respect their decision.
But again, never was I suggesting that you should share trade secrets that have been obtained from others.


but perhaps if you contact Luc directly Joe, and work with him somehow :beerchug: I am sure he would be more than happy to help you. I have Luc's email, contact me offline and I can send it to you or you can get in touch with Luc here. He's a cool guy! :thumbsup:

Thanks, I appreciate that. Hey, I'm just like everyone else in the CG community who has been blown away by his mind blowing renderings and I'm keen to learn more. My point is that sure, I can put in the R&D myself, which it looks like I will have to do, fair dues.

I hope that helps. Honestly I think Vray is an utter pain in the arse to start with, once you get over a few hurdles it becomes more bareable. Still quite slow to render though IMHO.

I've been on the XSI beta team for quite sometime and I've never been able to get the kind of control with human skin that I can obtain with MR. I'm sure it's possible, I've just not been able to do it...yet. That's why when I see such superb renderings showing up on this forum and others it makes me want to take a second look and investigate this more deeply, which I will do. I was hoping to get a leg-up with this, but I totally respect peoples decisions not to share if they don't want to.

..but as you can see from Luc's final results, it can look much better than anything else on the market, even any past renders from other artists dare I say it :sw:

Hey man, no argument, I agree. IMHO Luc's recent work represents a major milestone in CG. The quality is off the chart and I have nothing but the utmost respect for his skill.

Cheers,

Joe

[Infinite]

No problem, all good.

I think the main benefit with Vray is it's interaction with sIBL and HDR rendering as well as the red scatter effect you get in teh shadow volume, something MR lacks in.

[Manuel Poehlau]

I really like the work on the expression, would be cool to see some animations with this guy :)

About the vray sss2. For me it seems to be much easier to get good results compared to MR. For some reason, I was never able to get good results with the MR FastSkin shader, it always looked too waxy. But I guess it was just me and I just didn´t find the right settings.

With vray, I´m pretty far away of the results from Luc or Vimmy. But it looks far better than anything I could do with MR.
And while it is always helpfull to get some tips/ideas from others, you only get the result you want to achive, by experimenting yourself.
I spend only about 2 weeks now with Vray´s sss2, so I think it shouldn´t be that hard to get some decent results.

Rendering skin is something that a lot of people want to learn, so it might be a good idea to make a thread where we can share our ideas, tips and tricks. What do you think?

[meshmasters]

Rendering skin is something that a lot of people want to learn, so it might be a good idea to make a thread where we can share our ideas, tips and tricks. What do you think?

I think that would be an awesome idea, let's do it! :thumbsup:

Cheers,

Joe

[Infinite]

I really like the work on the expression, would be cool to see some animations with this guy :)

About the vray sss2. For me it seems to be much easier to get good results compared to MR. For some reason, I was never able to get good results with the MR FastSkin shader, it always looked too waxy. But I guess it was just me and I just didn´t find the right settings.

With vray, I´m pretty far away of the results from Luc or Vimmy. But it looks far better than anything I could do with MR.
And while it is always helpfull to get some tips/ideas from others, you only get the result you want to achive, by experimenting yourself.
I spend only about 2 weeks now with Vray´s sss2, so I think it shouldn´t be that hard to get some decent results.

Rendering skin is something that a lot of people want to learn, so it might be a good idea to make a thread where we can share our ideas, tips and tricks. What do you think?

I know what you mean but trust me like others I have spent years doing just that, test, after test, after test. It's a long journey, while picking up tips along the way and I think its great to share but not everyone shares that philosophy sadly. I guess because we live in this stupid monetary system... if it wasn't for that and a certain other thing (which seems to control humanity) we would be off travelling the stars! :thumbsup:

I would be happy to share my Mental Ray shader results if that is of any help. Vray, that's up to you Luc and Vimmy and anyone else who feels they have mastered it :notWorthy: I would love to know how to use Vray correctly :thumbsup: there seems to be so many variables you have to get right.

Here are my results so far from Vray (thanks to Luc for helping me with this) they take bloody ages to render though!

Vray and sIBL setups (low quality settings, took 6 mins a frame at 800x600):

1695

I have to confess I still prefer Mental Ray and LW's Simpleskin. :dance:

I will post my Mental Ray shader settings later.

[Infinite]

Some extra shots, Luc's setup is pretty robust. I recommend everyone bombard him to open up his box of tricks :sw: I have lost count how many people on ZBC have requested for Luc's settings. 3 dozen? maybe more?

smartIBL lighting from the very talented and sharing Christian Bloch's site - http://www.hdrlabs.com/sibl/archive.html

1694

[Manuel Poehlau]

Yeah, looks better than the last tests !

Really wants me to do a realistic head too. But first I need to finish my stylized Ron Mueck based head :)

[Bigguns]

Hi there.

I'm sure if you do some test with the sss2 you will get really good result, spend some days on and you will see, really simple compared to the fastskin of mr.

[Manuel Poehlau]

I agree to what you said Luc. It´s much more fun to figure it out yourself. And on the other side, just copy and paste settings won´t give you the result from the guy who figured out those settings. They can vary very much, depending on the textures, the light setup etc. Maybe good for a starting point.

And also I think your great results on your latest head came from a great combination of models,bump and textures, the sss is just a small part of it.

:beerchug:

[Infinite]

I agree to what you said Luc. It´s much more fun to figure it out yourself. And on the other side, just copy and paste settings won´t give you the result from the guy who figured out those settings. They can vary very much, depending on the textures, the light setup etc. Maybe good for a starting point.

And also I think your great results on your latest head came from a great combination of models,bump and textures, the sss is just a small part of it.

:beerchug:

Its true to a point but its like the chicken and the egg, everyone takes from everyone else (they just don't always tell you that) The originators are the programmers who designed the software in the first place, these are the gods!

There are lots of pieces of information out there, take Max Edwins amazing work on Song Hye Kyo http://www.cgarena.com/freestuff/tutorials/max/songhyekyo/

Max was one of the first great artists to sacrifice and share his knowledge a very commendable thing to do. Not many people follow this philosophy sadly.

If it wasn't for people like Paul Debevec, James Cameron and the like sharing, we wouldn't be at the stage we are at this point in time, doing CG like this.

[Manuel Poehlau]

Sure thing. It´s always great when people share their knowledge.
If you´re in a position, that you don´t have a job, I think it´s reasonable
if you don´t want to give it away for free.
I´m also looking for a job right now, so I can understand where he is coming from.
On the other side, an indepth "making of" can go through all the big cg communities and can get you a job. That´s another away to think about that.

If someone shares its knowledge, it´s great, but still you have to figure out yourself, how to make good use of it. I think that´s what I wanted to tell :)


Its true to a point but its like the chicken and the egg, everyone takes from everyone else (they just don't always tell you that) The originators are the programmers who designed the software in the first place, these are the gods!

There are lots of pieces of information out there, take Max Edwins amazing work on Song Hye Kyo http://www.cgarena.com/freestuff/tutorials/max/songhyekyo/

Max was one of the first great artists to sacrifice and share his knowledge a very commendable thing to do. Not many people follow this philosophy sadly.

If it wasn't for people like Paul Debevec, James Cameron and the like sharing, we wouldn't be at the stage we are at this point in time, doing CG like this.

[Yolao]

Hi Lee.

Amazing work, is astonishing. Thanks for sharing your techniques.

Please, can you help me with this questions.

1-So, after you use DI3Dview to match your base poly head to the hi-res data you can also project the details from the scan and the colors right..?, but when doing an expression do you also use DI3Dview and then apply this as a morph in zbrush i assume, can you also project the hi-res wrinkle details from the scan into the morph....?

2-You have to match the teeth as well, do you also use DI3Dview for this..?

3-For a face rig, do you separate the parts of a expression shape in regions, like just the mouth, the nose, etc, and also in left right side?

Thanks, and congratulations to the founders of this site is wonderful.

Cheers

[Infinite]

If someone shares its knowledge, it´s great, but still you have to figure out yourself, how to make good use of it. I think that´s what I wanted to tell :)

Yes i totally agree with your points :)

Hi Lee.

Amazing work, is astonishing. Thanks for sharing your techniques.

Please, can you help me with this questions.

1-So, after you use DI3Dview to match your base poly head to the hi-res data you can also project the details from the scan and the colors right..?, but when doing an expression do you also use DI3Dview and then apply this as a morph in zbrush i assume, can you also project the hi-res wrinkle details from the scan into the morph....?

2-You have to match the teeth as well, do you also use DI3Dview for this..?

3-For a face rig, do you separate the parts of a expression shape in regions, like just the mouth, the nose, etc, and also in left right side?

Thanks, and congratulations to the founders of this site is wonderful.

Cheers

Hi Yolao, I will try and answer your questions. Thanks for posting here.

1- yes that's correct you can project those details in ZBrush. Although I prefer to use an external application for texture baking as you have to use Polypaint in ZBrush and you have to have a very high subdivided mesh, even at 8 million polys you don't get all the high resolution colour from the textures. Until Pixologic make texture painting in ZBrush resolution depended on the texture and not Polypaint it's not a viable option, well unless you have a super comuter and can work on billion polygon objects. But then again Mari should be out soon!

2- No the teeth are made by eye, you can find a free set on my models site ;) in the free section .

Although, Dawson is sending me his own set of teeth this week. He had moulds taken at the authodontist, so I will be scanning them with the Artec-Scanner for that extra realism.

3- Currently I do not rig, all these expression tests where to see if the pipeline was feasible, which it is. It only takes about 2 hours now per expression. They would be used as reference only for face rigs as moprhing face rigs alone is just to simple because they cannot simulate skin moving over muscle and bone. Great for reference but nothing more.

I hope that helps.

Here is another test from Lightwave. I have to say after using Lightwave for the last 15 years, I am now a Mental Ray and 3DSMax addict. It seems Lightwave is on the way out anyway now but I can still use it to tincker around with...... good bye old friend! :thumbsup:

Lightwave test:

1705

[meshmasters]

...Although, Dawson is sending me his own set of teeth this week. He had moulds taken at the authodontist, so I will be scanning them with the Artec-Scanner for that extra realism.


That is exactly how I work here. I make dental impressions and scan them at very high res. Then retopo, and insert in head.

This workflow provides for a very high degree of realism.

Cheers,

Joe

[Infinite]

That is exactly how I work here. I make dental impressions and scan them at very high res. Then retopo, and insert in head.

This workflow provides for a very high degree of realism.

Cheers,

Joe

It would be great to see some pictures Joe.

I will be posting my findings next week.

Cheers

Lee

[Yolao]

1- yes that's correct you can project those details in ZBrush. Although I prefer to use an external application for texture baking as you have to use Polypaint in ZBrush and you have to have a very high subdivided mesh, even at 8 million polys you don't get all the high resolution colour from the textures. Until Pixologic make texture painting in ZBrush resolution depended on the texture and not Polypaint it's not a viable option, well unless you have a super comuter and can work on billion polygon objects. But then again Mari should be out soon!



thanks Lee, what do you use for color texture projection.....bodypaint and 3dsmax i suppose?..

[Infinite]

thanks Lee, what do you use for color texture projection?..

Hi Yolao, if you check post #32 you will see that I used 3DSMax. :) but you can use any package that supports ray baking.

[Yolao]

Hi Yolao, if you check post #32 you will see that I used 3DSMax. :) but you can use any package that supports ray baking.

hey Lee, you answer before i edit my post..thanks...

[drummermenco]

it's great to see your workflow! great work as usual and thanks for sharing all this stuff!! :bouncy:

[msmbrush]

Infinite very very very informative Awesome Brake Down clapclap

[Infinite]

..thanks for your comments guys.

Here's another example of the quick turn around time from using 3D Scans, made this female test yestarday (she needs hair!)

The new girl:

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/Emily-Big_Comp-01_sml.jpg (http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/Emily-Big_Comp-01.jpg)

Anyone have any crits on this, the eyes just don't seem quite right...

[meshmasters]

I don't know Lee, perhaps it's my monitor but often I find that the examples you produce using sibl look at bit strange to me, like there is too little contrast or something but there is something that bothers me about them. It feels like there is layer of white haze/fog being added. Perhaps it's because they are being displayed in isolation outside of the lighting environment. I'm sure I'm not doing a good job of explaining what I am seeing/feeling... but there is something that doesn't feel right to me. Maybe you'll understand what I'm on about.

Cheers,

Joe

[Infinite]

Joe, it might depend on how your monitor is set up?

I am using LWF when rendering out images, the renders check out fine on my calibrated monitors and look quite contrasted if I check on either of my laptops, so not sure what s going on there.

They all come out as 32 bit EXR images so I have allot of control over exposure and contrast, easy to fix.

Maybe anyone else might have some suggestions?

Cheers,

Lee

[meshmasters]

Joe, it might depend on how your monitor is set up?

I am using LWF when rendering out images, the renders check out fine on my calibrated monitors and look quite contrasted if I check on either of my laptops, so not sure what s going on there.

They all come out as 32 bit EXR images so I have allot of control over exposure and contrast, easy to fix.

Maybe anyone else might have some suggestions?

Cheers,

Lee

Hi Lee,

It could well be. The monitor that I use to view and communicate with on the internet is not calibrated in any special way. I'll try and have a look with some of my other machines and see if I notice any changes.

Cheers,

Joe

[Infinite]

Hi Lee,

It could well be. The monitor that I use to view and communicate with on the internet is not calibrated in any special way. I'll try and have a look with some of my other machines and see if I notice any changes.

Cheers,

Joe

Well your not the first to notice, last observation I had from someone was that my images were too dalk and contrasted! so it's hard to know who is using the right setup sometimes.

I just bought a Spyder Elite calbration kit, hopefully that might help me see what's going on this end, then I might know for sure which comments to talk on board.

[meshmasters]

Well your not the first to notice, last observation I had from someone was that my images were too dalk and contrasted! so it's hard to know who is using the right setup sometimes.

I just bought a Spyder Elite calbration kit, hopefully that might help me see what's going on this end, then I might know for sure which comments to talk on board.


I've got a Spyder too, and I find it very helpful. However, I think this issue brings to light a very interesting point (no pun intended...he..he..). That is, how much one can depend upon "proper" monitor calibration in the first place. What I mean is let's face it the vast majority of people viewing images on the web will most likely not be using any type of calibrated monitor. So as an a DCC creator what is one to do? Does one try and please the general public or does one try and please the technical community...or both?

My view on this is that it's a good idea to try and find the middle ground (if that is even possible). I try and view the images I make on a lot of different monitors, browsers, etc and see if any of them seem way off... if not, most likely they are good to go regardless of what the Spyder might say about it ;-)

Regardless, this is a difficult issue to overcome because unfortunately one can never be sure what kind of monitor the end user has or how it has been set up (or not).

In any case, I think this is a really interesting topic and I'd sure be interested in hearing other artists thoughts on this subject.

Lastly, Lee your new model looks really awesome! Great work as always man.

Cheers,

Joe

[Infinite]

Yeah I agree, and that's what I can't quite understand as the images look fine on my laptop, as my laptop generally displays images darker and more contrasted.

I know one of the lighting types in the picture might look a little washed out (2nd lot from bottom) but it doesn't look that bad to me. These are all also using a more widespread lighting setup from the sIBL sets.

Once I can figure out the ideal calibration (to suit the middle ground) I can easily tweak the renders in PS to match I think.

BTW your feedback is most appreciated, if people didn't comment, I would never know otherwise.

I will investigate further.

[meshmasters]

Also, just so you know, I don't think that there is anything major going on here. This is only a little niggle that I "feel" when viewing some of these...it's difficult to describe..there is just a little something that sticks out to my eye. This could be just me...I'm not sure, so don't drive yourself bonkers :-)

Cheers,

Joe

[madmatt]

Really nice tests Lee, I find the 3th orientation/set of iBLs the best because the others makes strange reflections on the eyes. For the problems of visualization I think that's because you render out with a black Background, if you could post with the hdri image in the back, we can compare the different feeligs.

Bye

P.S.: I use a Dell U2410 in sRGB mode and I see all well contrasted & lighted, maybe the highlights are a little bit bright in some sets, and not hyper contrasted but i found it good...

[Infinite]

Really nice tests Lee, I find the 3th orientation/set of iBLs the best because the others makes strange reflections on the eyes. For the problems of visualization I think that's because you render out with a black Background, if you could post with the hdri image in the back, we can compare the different feeligs.

Bye

P.S.: I use a Dell U2410 in sRGB mode and I see all well contrasted & lighted, maybe the highlights are a little bit bright in some sets, and not hyper contrasted but i found it good...

Hi madmatt, thanks for your comments and tips. What do you mean by 3th orientation/set of sIBLs?

[Manuel Poehlau]

I got really interested in this scanning workflow. While it is a little bit of cheating on one side, I think there is a lot you can learn while working with real world data. It´s not so different compared to traditional sculpters/maskmakers, who learn a good deal of information,when they work with face casts.
You can use this information for your own sculpts.
I think it´s much more valuable than working from distorted photographs.

I don´t have a 3d scanner, but I´ve got a really cool face scan from a friend.
It has a really nice asymmetrical face structure and I thought it would be cool to create a character/creature with this scan data.
There is no photo texture, just the mesh, so I will have to create the textures from scratch.

I am thinking of eventually making a step by step for my workflow,too. I will use some different tools and ways of doing it.So it might be interesting for some people, if I write down the problems and solutions I will have, while working on this.

[madmatt]

Hi madmatt, thanks for your comments and tips. What do you mean by 3th orientation/set of sIBLs?

I hope that's that HELPs, I allowed me to write some notes for explain you how I see the images in my monitor.

However I am convinced that if you put the head in a HDRI background we've diffrent feelings.

Bye

[Infinite]

I hope that's that HELPs, I allowed me to write some notes for explain you how I see the images in my monitor.

However I am convinced that if you put the head in a HDRI background we've diffrent feelings.

Bye

That's very helpful thanks. It's amazing you saw the reflection error on the 1st set of images, she was force using a a different reflection image in her eyes (which I removed for the later images) I will play around with the setup some more. Thanks for taking the time to critique.

I got really interested in this scanning workflow. While it is a little bit of cheating on one side, I think there is a lot you can learn while working with real world data. It´s not so different compared to traditional sculpters/maskmakers, who learn a good deal of information,when they work with face casts.
You can use this information for your own sculpts.
I think it´s much more valuable than working from distorted photographs.

I think I mentioned before. To me this is kind of like apples and oranges. It's like saying using a Wacom and Pen is cheating or that hand animation is much better than motion capture. It's just another tool to the trade and helps a great deal, removing most things that get lost in translation when creating characters from scratch. People that have the ability to do it well by hand, is fantastic. Some of us aren't that gifted though.

But your right, you learn so much more by working with the data, its a great way to understand the flow and structure of the human body. You learn so much along the way.

Although I have found with these scanners, they only really get you about 60-65% of the data you need, the rest is down to the artist to clean up the data and compensate by eye, let alone transferring the scanned detail and texture information over to a usable low polygon subdivision mesh, which is a whole other story and a tricky process to say the least.

Perhaps higher end, more expensive scanners are less work to process the data? I don't know.. :drool:


I don´t have a 3d scanner, but I´ve got a really cool face scan from a friend.
It has a really nice asymmetrical face structure and I thought it would be cool to create a character/creature with this scan data.
There is no photo texture, just the mesh, so I will have to create the textures from scratch.

I am thinking of eventually making a step by step for my workflow,too. I will use some different tools and ways of doing it.So it might be interesting for some people, if I write down the problems and solutions I will have, while working on this.

That sounds great, I can't wait to see. clap

[meshmasters]

Although I have found with these scanners, they only really get you about 60-65% of the data you need, the rest is down to the artist to clean up the data and compensate by eye, let alone transferring the scanned detail and texture information over to a usable low polygon subdivision mesh, which is a whole other story and a tricky process to say the least.

Perhaps higher end, more expensive scanners are less work to process the data? I don't know.. :drool:


Quite right...well said Lee.

Scanning takes you a good part of the way... but certainly not all of the way as you point out. No matter how expensive your scanner may be the data will need some amount of editing and that still requires patience, skill and knowledge. As any one who works with scan data on a daily basis will tell you, it's not the one button make art solution that many think it to be and artistic ability is still required.

IMHO the thing that makes scanning data particularly powerful is that you are working from datasets that have known values. It's not purely artistic guesswork and this can be an enormous aid setting up scenes, determining real world lighting values, or even trying to match objects accurately to a background plate.

Cheers,

Joe

[Rishi]

Infinite - Very informative and excellent workflow.I have some doubts about the material transfer option in DI3D,if possible could you please help me in that.
How does it work?I have done the shape transfer but not texture.

So it would be great if you describe the process for material transfer in DI3D.



Thanks

[Infinite]

Infinite - Very informative and excellent workflow.I have some doubts about the material transfer option in DI3D,if possible could you please help me in that.
How does it work?I have done the shape transfer but not texture.

So it would be great if you describe the process for material transfer in DI3D.



Thanks

I Rishi, have you purchased a DI3D sytem? Just curious.

I don't use the material transfer built into DI3D I bake the textures from one model to another in 3DSMax. See more info here on Page 4 - http://www.cgfeedback.com/cgfeedback/showthread.php?t=468&page=4

[majid_smiley]

Impressive !!! please share some render settings here !

[Rishi]

Infinite- Thank you for the info.No we haven't purchase it yet,we are trying on a demo version,if everything goes smoothly then we might buy it.

[Infinite]

Infinite- Thank you for the info.No we haven't purchase it yet,we are trying on a demo version,if everything goes smoothly then we might buy it.

Well I highly recommend it. Once you try it you will never look back, the hardware is scalable and the captured results are incredible. The shapetransfer software alone is worth it's weight in Gold. You can basicaly swap data between any meshes in minutes using matching landmarks. I'm amazed Mudbox or ZBrush don't have this feature. In fact no other 3rd party app has apart from Gator in Softimage but that is lacking.

It's also possible to create normal mapped data from captures to help create true bump mapping. Although a slightly more complex setup but possible.

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/posts/plain-b_sml.jpg

http://www.ir-ltd.net/uploads/posts/roar-b_sml.jpg