I was beginning to think that the fastscatter node might be the answer (e.g. from 2008 "...Fastscatter handles backlight SSS...") until I found 2005's   "...only to discover that Point Lights cannot have Depth Mapped Shadows (which FastScatter requires)..." , and then this 2012 comment from bagginsbill: "...FastScatter and the Translucence channel are pretty much self-lit. Get rid of that..." So maybe translucence/fastscatter are non-starters?

I mentioned in the previous post that I guessed that the scatter node wasn't actually doing much. So just to check that I tried the old-fashioned very simple diffuse/specular/bump (no alternate). Here's the result (and yes, I forget to apply the transparency mask to specular strength, hence the ghostly white squares):

I think that more-or-less confirms what I thought? Here's the very, very basic shader I used (render settings were exactly the same as before):

Obviously my observations are limited to this specific scene/viewpoint with its specific lighting setup.

Going back to bagginsbill's comment that "... Since they have no thickness, scatter doesn't really do its job, which is a big part of the realism of a leaf shader...", I'm intrigued by the "...doesn't really do it's job..." part.

• So for one-sided zero-thickness leaves does the scatter node do enough to be worth using?

• Are there certain situations where we will see a difference (e.g. backlit leaves shadowing each other)?

---

The 3Dcheapskate (also available in DAZ and HiveWire3D flavours) occasionally posts sensible stuff. Usually by accident.
And it usually uses Poser 11, with units set to inches. Except when it's using Poser 6 or PP2014, or when its units are set to PNU.