PDA

View Full Version : NO Soft Shadows In VPR?



Tony3d
03-12-2013, 01:44 PM
IS VPR suppose to show soft shadows, because if so mine stopped working in 11.5?

Sensei
03-12-2013, 01:57 PM
Picture is worth thousand words...

No, I don't know what you're talking about.
Without soft shadows area light would be completely opaque shadow without smooth transitions = area light would look like point light..

Turning off draft mode would increase quality.

Tony3d
03-12-2013, 02:00 PM
I have a spotlight in mine scene with soft shadows. It renders ok , but the soft shadows show up as hard edged in VPR.

Sensei
03-12-2013, 02:12 PM
I picked up spotlight as light type, instead of area, and it appears completely not soft shadows.. Either in VPR and F9 render..
Even with Soft Edge Angle quite high..

jeric_synergy
03-12-2013, 02:15 PM
You mean a shadow-mapped shadow? I was using one of those just yesterday. And no, VPR doesn't seem to support it.

FTM, I can't make the shadow very fuzzy at all! hmmm, been so long..... oh, made the shadow map too big, even 'fuzzy' it was sharp. Never had enough RAM back in the day for that to happen.

Tony3d
03-12-2013, 03:35 PM
Thanks guys.

bobakabob
03-12-2013, 03:50 PM
So the Spotlight soft shadow map function is broken in LW 11.5... In f9, VPR or both? :(

Celshader
03-12-2013, 03:54 PM
I didn't know anyone was still using shadow-mapped spotlights. I thought DP's raytraced Flood (http://dpont.pagesperso-orange.fr/plugins/lights/Additional_Lights.html) Light had replaced it.

bobakabob
03-12-2013, 05:11 PM
Hmmm, many thanks for the info, didn't know this existed... 8~
Found the link, DP's lights look amazing. Looking forward to trying them out, it's like a free LW upgrade :)

Dillon
03-12-2013, 06:26 PM
I also noticed soft shadows with shadow maps don't work, no matter how high I cranked the shadow map size to be.

jeric_synergy
03-12-2013, 06:57 PM
I also noticed soft shadows with shadow maps don't work, no matter how high I cranked the shadow map size to be.
Well, TMK they'll never work in VPR, but in renders the problem is the higher the shadow map size, the less fuzzy the shadow will be. Back in the day I never cranked it very high, for obvious reasons. Drop the size back to 4K and you'll get fuzziness again in the render.

with a shadow map of 10K and a fuzziness value of 100, I got a nice soft edge.

OH, lemme check....f9 f9 f9 f9 f9.... Seems to work w/most cameras.

Emmanuel
04-15-2014, 12:16 PM
Ditto here :(
No, not everybody uses a plugin light :(

Danner
04-15-2014, 02:17 PM
I still use shadow mapped lights everyday, For one reason alone, they are the fastest soft shadow option, specially when you turn shadow map cache on.

They do have their limitations:

1. They can bleed through walls or similarly closed geometry
2. They don't show up in VPR (it's a pre-process and VPR doesn't show those)
3. When using cache the First frame of an animation can take quite a while to compute all the shadows if you make them high rez and have dozens of lights.
4. Transparent objects cast shadows as if they were not transparent. So if you are using alphas to make plants for example, use clipmaps instead of transparency, clipmaps work fine with shadow mapped lights.
5. keep the cone below 65 or you'll have to use large resolutions. If you don't, you'll risk bleeding and jagged shadows.

Snosrap
04-15-2014, 02:21 PM
Shadow maps were a hack done back in the day to get soft shadows without a lot of overhead. As Celshader said, DP has filled that gap with more modern spotlight. It would be nice if NT were to include a new one too while keeping the old one around for legacy purposes only.

jwiede
04-16-2014, 02:38 AM
It would be nice if NT were to include a new one too while keeping the old one around for legacy purposes only.
Yikes, please, no. If they want to add a pref that changes spots between "new" and old behavior, I'd be okay with that, but LW already suffers from WAY too much needless replication. DP lights already mean we have multiples of major light types, adding multiple similar-but-slightly-different LW-native types to the mix won't really "help" anyone, IMO.

Or, ya know, just have DP lights replace the existing LW lights completely. Legacy folks already have major issues reliably loading such scenes into current versions for a whole host of other reasons. Frankly, "if you need old LW feature behavior, install and render with the old version" is already the only reliable legacy solution. Extending that position to lights, but getting DP lights native, doesn't seem like too bad a trade-off. Presuming, of course, they could somehow get Denis P. to go for it.

Oh well, nice to dream.

Snosrap
04-16-2014, 04:09 PM
Yikes, please, no. If they want to add a pref that changes spots between "new" and old behavior, I'd be okay with that, but LW already suffers from WAY too much needless replication. I'd be okay with that as I have not used shadow maps for over 10 years, but others I'm sure would disagree. :)

Tobian
04-16-2014, 05:21 PM
Shadow maps are not soft lights, they are an occlusion preprocess image, which is blurred, in 2D Since VPR can't handle any preprocesses (other than radiosity), it won't work. As others have said use the DP floor, or just pop a ball light behind a gobo / inside a cup, to get a much more realistic spotlight.

It's sad to say some studios and users still do use such antiquated methods, but they are what they are, FAST: true soft shadows can be expensive to render, and very slow. LW sadly doesn't even use any of the more advanced methods, such as deep shadow maps, to overcome the resolution issue, and the changing penumbra shape, the further from the emitter it is ( I believe DP does but I've not tried it) .