It so gets to me when clients says...

[rivoli]

Sheen is not a subjective term. It has an actual definition that is found in the dictionary.

I thought Dmitry's comment was tongue in cheek, I suppose he knows what to do when asked to add some sheen.
speaking of long meetings, I reckon it can be equally frustrating if you have to google what the client's telling you to find out what it means.

[AJ Jefferies]

I have been trapped in a nightmare scenario recently with a client who has wanted something to have a 'glassy' appearance. I made it refractive/reflective and, well, like glass and they said "No, not transparent - glassy!".

I added some fogging and they hated it.
Glossy refractions and they hated it.
I tried SSS2 and they hated it.

They then said "It needs to have strong highlights, like glass!", so I made it solid, dialled up the reflections and they said "No, it shouldn't have any reflections!"

So I currently find myself trying to make something 'glassy' that cannot be refractive or refractive.

It's going well!

[crazy homeless guy]

I have been trapped in a nightmare scenario recently with a client who has wanted something to have a 'glassy' appearance. I made it refractive/reflective and, well, like glass and they said "No, not transparent - glassy!".

I added some fogging and they hated it.
Glossy refractions and they hated it.
I tried SSS2 and they hated it.

They then said "It needs to have strong highlights, like glass!", so I made it solid, dialled up the reflections and they said "No, it shouldn't have any reflections!"

So I currently find myself trying to make something 'glassy' that cannot be refractive or refractive.

It's going well!

Did they provide a sample photo of what they want? From your description it sounds to me like they are looking for something along the lines of a back painted glass.... Which will have reflection but the bright areas of the reflection will be quite a bit stronger than the rest of the reflection.

http://www.dreamwallsglass.com/wp-co...e-1024x672.jpg

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...d21353decb.jpg

http://alhabibalumglass.com/images/g...edglass/p2.jpg

[AJ Jefferies]

Unfortunately, it isn't for a 'real' thing, it's for a cartoon character.

They can't provide any reference as they haven't seen anything that looks the way they want it to look. I wish I was joking.

[instinct]

I'd say it typically refers more to rim light (or fresnel like silloutte / angle based colour or brightness shift) rather than reflections or highlights.

[Morbid Angel]

It cracks me up how you guys take it so seriously )))

[instinct]

But that's the whole point isn't it? Now go dial some red into the green :P

[rivoli]

hang on, must go and google what you mean by seriously.

[Mokiki]

I have been trapped in a nightmare scenario recently with a client who has wanted something to have a 'glassy' appearance. I made it refractive/reflective and, well, like glass and they said "No, not transparent - glassy!".

I added some fogging and they hated it.
Glossy refractions and they hated it.
I tried SSS2 and they hated it.

They then said "It needs to have strong highlights, like glass!", so I made it solid, dialled up the reflections and they said "No, it shouldn't have any reflections!"

So I currently find myself trying to make something 'glassy' that cannot be refractive or refractive.

It's going well!

We had a job like that a while ago from a pharmaceutic company who had some brilliant idea for their next print ad. They wanted a newton's cradle made out of water and the spheres at the bottom should be a water shell filled to around 50-60% with water in a completely white circular clinical room. They gave photo reference of a lot of highspeed water photography showing the look of what we were supposed to achieve. They made some snarky comments about how the client is very knowledge about how water behaves etc. and that it had to look photoreal. In the following 2 month we spent in a constant back and forth between them and us telling how refractions and reflections were all wrong (they weren't at least from an objective standpoint). In the end we had to kill all refractions etc + some real weird photoshop stuff to finally satisfy the client. The end product looked like a bad photo collage of elements without any realism and internal logic. But apparently the client loved it.
Half a year later we stumbled onto the picture we did but heavily modified the geometry etc and all were the same but the water constructions were made to look like chrome.

Personally this was the most frustrating client interaction I have ever had.

@Dmitry
We still love you.

[Morbid Angel]

Lol.

Some one referred to the "sheen" term as a render man value. Well, it's all good, if the client had slightest clue how a shader worked, let alone a render man shader ))

[raymarcher]

Isnt it called coating in cg?

[dlparisi]

Now the LAPD is involved...CNN

I saw the headline today and thought they were speaking to us...

[glorybound]

One of my biggest client issues is when they try to run the show. I give them the schedule, the process, and they assume that it is suggestions, or something. I model the building and get feedback before I model the site. The site is usually more complicated and takes a lot of work. If the building changes then you have to rework a lot of the site. Today, I sent a building for proof and the architect's reply was, "I don't want to see this again until the site is done!" Really! I'll email him in a few days asking for the building comments

[Morne]

"I want the glass MORE seethrough and a LOT more reflective"

"Can you add some SHEEN to the floor tiles" > "Why does the floor look so slippery?"

[dlparisi]

"I want the glass MORE seethrough and a LOT more reflective"

Yeah, get that one a lot. I also get the similar..."can you make the glass more see through but we don't want to see anything on the inside."