PDA

View Full Version : Terragen 4...under development.



prometheus
12-11-2015, 03:02 AM
not a release, only a blog release where upcoming development details will be revealed.
Cloud fractals are as always topnotch..though it requires special artists with know how mostly.

I hope they can improve on both the previewer speed and final speed as well as UI friendlyness, those are the things that have annoyed me about terragen, the render quality and realism? well I have never had any reason to complain about that.

http://terragen4.com/

Michael

kopperdrake
12-11-2015, 03:42 AM
It certainly can produce some stunning scenery. I wish I had the excuse and time to play with it. Is it a question of producing assets within LightWave and exporting them to Terragen, to get the most from it?

prometheus
12-11-2015, 04:43 AM
It certainly can produce some stunning scenery. I wish I had the excuse and time to play with it. Is it a question of producing assets within LightWave and exporting them to Terragen, to get the most from it?

assets?..No not necessary, depends on what you want to acheive...for scenary vegetation is probably the only thing needed which may require external tree object etc..other than that, for landscape scenary it will do fine as it is to get the most from it.
Another matter if you need it for including vehicles, boats spaceships etc..then again you can get models elsewhere too for that, unless you have your own designes etc...animation and animated people, robots or animals..that may require the use of softwave like Lightwave though.

Not that aware of the pipeline between terragen and lightwave..have only tried terragen demos briefly, only to find out that I donīt like the UI and the renderspeed for the previewer is horrible...just hoping they can really boost that, they said it was improved in 2.0, but I couldnīt really see any significant speed on it, vue previewer is way more faster and acceptable.

though if you can stand the node network UI and the very slow preview feedback..go for it..the cloud fractal and the lighting render quality is top notch in the industry I think.

dickbill
12-11-2015, 07:17 AM
Agree with Prometheus, for what it does Terragen is hyper-realistic, but, compare that to Vue for example. The big advantage of Vue is the scene transfer pipeline with LW, including the camera position and focal, the objects refreshed in real time etc.
It was designed for compositing in mind. Vue native rendering is not as good as Terragen, it was 'flat' in Vue5, but that was easily improved in postprocess in LW or Photoshop. Typically, a Vue scene containing thousands of objects is rendered under Volumetric light that would take ages to render in LW, then the scene is transferred to LW for re-rendering, using the Vue image output as a background.
Can you do that with the new Terragen4?

prometheus
12-11-2015, 09:54 AM
I rather skip those landscape software and I am wishing for it all to be lightwave..may take a while still to get there ..always thought that is the way to go if new volumetrics is implemented properly, we are about to get new volumetrics for the voxel part, that alone will not do it though, it needs a fully spectral volumetric atmosphere and procedural infinite cloud layers..donīt think that will happen in the 2016 release though, only improved general voxel volumetrics.
No fuss with comping, camera matching object transfer etc...or light interaction..all in lightwave please :)

With the new upcoming geo engine and with instancing tech, I believe it would not be so difficult to acheive terrain work and vegetation almost in the same league as the specific landscape software are presenting, just needs that sky model and tru sun volumetric lights, some additional fractals and materials.. some additional enhancements on microdisplacement and the ability to deform sculpt the terrain directly in layout...I guess it may take a few years more to catch up in that area..(But that is provided If they put it on the agenda so to speak, otherwise it will not take a few years but decades)...meanwhile you may want or need to go with the specific landscape software.

m.d.
12-11-2015, 10:44 AM
I rather skip those landscape software and I am wishing for it all to be lightwave..may take a while still to get there ..always thought that is the way to go if new volumetrics is implemented properly, we are about to get new volumetrics for the voxel part, that alone will not do it though, it needs a fully spectral volumetric atmosphere and procedural infinite cloud layers..donīt think that will happen in the 2016 release though, only improved general voxel volumetrics.
No fuss with comping, camera matching object transfer etc...or light interaction..all in lightwave please :)

With the new upcoming geo engine and with instancing tech, I believe it would not be so difficult to acheive terrain work and vegetation almost in the same league as the specific landscape software are presenting, just needs that sky model and tru sun volumetric lights, some additional fractals and materials.. some additional enhancements on microdisplacement and the ability to deform sculpt the terrain directly in layout...I guess it may take a few years more to catch up in that area..(But that is provided If they put it on the agenda so to speak, otherwise it will not take a few years but decades)...meanwhile you may want or need to go with the specific landscape software.

Bought Terragen a few months back, one thing I would disagree an being able to do in LW is the terrain.

There terrain fractals are just as good as their cloud fractals, and they just released an erosion plugin that will procedurally calculate erosion channels based on terrain flow. Outside of world machine this is probably the best terrain fractals out there. The surfacing of the terrain is top notch as well, the control you get.

The lines are blurring however.....I would rather use LW instancing and octane render for a vegetation scene...but terragens atmospherics are really hard to give up.

The UI takes some getting used to, but I really like it now....quite logical.

As far as the rendering, it can be slow....they use micropoly for terrain and ray tracing for objects/instances and some atmospheric....so the render is done in 2 passes. If they integrated a GPU ray tracer it would speed things up a lot....

Very small team, basically 2 guys...as the third one moved on. And very weak documentation

prometheus
12-11-2015, 11:12 AM
Bought Terragen a few months back, one thing I would disagree an being able to do in LW is the terrain.

There terrain fractals are just as good as their cloud fractals, and they just released an erosion plugin that will procedurally calculate erosion channels based on terrain flow. Outside of world machine this is probably the best terrain fractals out there. The surfacing of the terrain is top notch as well, the control you get.

Very small team, basically 2 guys...as the third one moved on. And very weak documentation


Yes..you are probably right to disagree with the terrain creation in lightwave with reference to the erosion part..maybe the terrain fractal too, but...as I said, with a bit of better new fractals in lightwave and microdisplacement techs, or something like octane, the gap will not be as huge..maybe with natural erosion calculations in such case, and I did state with the new upcoming release of improved geo engine ..which is a bit vague indeed, but I think it sort of reveals a promise of better polyhandling and maybe vertex editing on the terrain..but itīs a bit of guessing.

two guys only in the team, that I didnīt know of..I wonder how many they are at eonsoftware..honestly I think vue has developed in a much faster pace than terragen.
Lightwave in terms of development for getting tools for landscape scenery is way behind though..and hasnīt gotten much attention, I recall ogo taiki having the atmosphere engine fully volumetric with godrays long before vue got any volumetric clouds at all, then it all changed when they introduced the spectral atmosphere model.

We will see improved volumetrics for voxel types in the upcoming lightwave 2016, which I am sure will help create better cloud stuff for some occasions, but I am afraid that isnīt enough to compete a full sky/cloud model as terragen and vue has.
the ozone plugin for lightwave have had my dislikes for every version eon software released, wouldnīt buy it and I donīt see it as a good plugin to use with lightwave ..I wish for something else.

m.d.
12-11-2015, 11:51 AM
If LW has good atmospherics....you could probably do everything Terragen can with LW+ World machine.

The biggest caveat with external terrains...is they come in as height maps....so no overhangs etc. Terragen does have a 'microexporter' which will export a terrain as the micropoly render sees it (basically post render).....so it could be huge, but all procedural effects will be baked in including overhangs and non vertical displacements

Terragen has some other utility uses LW will probably never touch...like georeferenced displacement DEM's automatically located on the proper world position etc....
But these are pretty specialized and not needed by most.

prometheus
12-11-2015, 02:16 PM
If LW has good atmospherics....you could probably do everything Terragen can with LW+ World machine.

The biggest caveat with external terrains...is they come in as height maps....so no overhangs etc. Terragen does have a 'microexporter' which will export a terrain as the micropoly render sees it (basically post render).....so it could be huge, but all procedural effects will be baked in including overhangs and non vertical displacements

Terragen has some other utility uses LW will probably never touch...like georeferenced displacement DEM's automatically located on the proper world position etc....
But these are pretty specialized and not needed by most.

Yes..interesting and I would say correct reflections.

terrain overhang..yeah, lw brush sculpting in layout would be the thing...vue got it for itīs terrain.
georeferenced DEMīs ...probably not that important, depends on..if you are to work with specialized areas it might be important.

m.d.
12-11-2015, 02:44 PM
terrain overhang..yeah, lw brush sculpting in layout would be the thing...vue got it for itīs terrain.


Overhangs was probably not the correct term to use...
Any non vertical displacement is an issue with height maps
See my little example below.

Even on micro overhang...this becomes an issue. Canyon walls beyond vertical cliffs, caves....even divots in the sides of a rock are all a no go. Would have a hard time fixing those details with LW brush.
Vector displacement would be the way to go....if you can get the map...zbrush can output it, not sure of any others though
131431

Dougster
12-11-2015, 03:14 PM
Is it wrong for me to have decided to buy Vue instead of Terragen purely because Eon had Black Friday pricing and Planetside didn't?

m.d.
12-11-2015, 03:25 PM
Vue is a pretty powerful tool....way better for populations, especially animated ones.
I wouldn't regret it...that sale was in my junk folder on my email and I missed it...otherwise I would have been very tempted

Money being equal, I would probably go with VUE...but TG is a lot cheaper

Marander
12-11-2015, 04:00 PM
Is it wrong for me to have decided to buy Vue instead of Terragen purely because Eon had Black Friday pricing and Planetside didn't?

I don't think so. Bought Vue XStream 2015 and so far I'm very convinced with the atmosphere, terrain, material and cloud quality. Very powerful terrain editing possibilities. Renders can take a bit long and there's some tweaking to do for high quality renders. Don't know about vegetation yet.

Vue was used for Terminator, Narnia, Avatar, Sucker Punch, Pirates of Caribbean , Epic, Ice Age 4, Madagscar, Tintin, Legend of the guardians, How to train your dragon 2 etc. And I think many big production studios use it successfully without mentioning it. Not sure about Terragen, haven't heared about it being used in a feature film.

The QuadSpinner materials, tools and nodes for Vue are also great, a bit pricy but really worth it.

HarverdGrad
12-11-2015, 04:12 PM
I don't think so. Bought Vue XStream 2015 and so far I'm very convinced with the atmosphere, terrain, material and cloud quality. Very powerful terrain editing possibilities. Renders can take a bit long and there's some tweaking to do for high quality renders. Don't know about vegetation yet.

Vue was used for Terminator, Narnia, Avatar, Sucker Punch, Pirates of Caribbean , Epic, Ice Age 4, Madagscar, Tintin, Legend of the guardians, How to train your dragon 2 etc. And I think many big production studios use it successfully without mentioning it. Not sure about Terragen, haven't heared about it being used in a feature film.

The QuadSpinner materials, tools and nodes for Vue are also great, a bit pricy but really worth it.


This guy has a differing opinion:

No, not so accurate, they were used for little more than a base for concepting. That's E-on marketing! Along side the environments for Clash of the Titans, which I personally worked on. I recall we purchased 35 Vue nodes on the farm and after lengthy testing, we canned any attempts to work with it due to unrealistic render times, noise etc. E-on's marketing team get news of a project using Vue and suddenly they slap Vue logo's over the hero environment shots; it's a little cheap. Though on the plus side; people buy into it, this sells their software, and one day we might have a tool that actually works well, and Vue has the potential.


Source: http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=2&t=1325420

m.d.
12-11-2015, 04:15 PM
Vue was used for Terminator, Narnia, Avatar, Sucker Punch, Pirates of Caribbean , Epic, Ice Age 4, Madagscar, Tintin, Legend of the guardians, How to train your dragon 2 etc. And I think many big production studios use it successfully without mentioning it. Not sure about Terragen, haven't heared about it being used in a feature film.



Terragen goes back further then Vue in feature films AFAIK.... It was originally developed partly at Digital Domain for 'Stealth' and Star Trek Nemesis
heres a small list
http://www.planetside.co.uk/galleries/tg-in-film

Marander
12-11-2015, 04:22 PM
This guy has a differing opinion

Yes looks like they have a good marketing LOL but still I'm sure it's used a lot. There's an interview with a dreamworks guy who uses it a heavily but I guess it doesn't fit in all big budget productions. But besides maybe Houdini and custom VFX development what would be the alternative?

Marander
12-11-2015, 04:25 PM
Terragen goes back further then Vue in feature films AFAIK.... It was originally developed partly at Digital Domain for 'Stealth' and Star Trek Nemesis
heres a small list
http://www.planetside.co.uk/galleries/tg-in-film

That's interesting, didn't know that. However I think both tools have potential and go way beyond LWs capabilities.

Dougster
12-11-2015, 06:55 PM
I certainly don't regret my purchase of Vue, at least not yet, LOL! I appreciate Vladimir Chopine's comparison of Vue and Terragen on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLSGXnsEtGDVdOgxf_vXqz3IMzD3TDzR57 If Terragen ever goes on sale again for $489, I'll definitely grab it. I can see getting a copy of World Machine as well...

prometheus
12-12-2015, 04:06 AM
This guy has a differing opinion:

No, not so accurate, they were used for little more than a base for concepting. That's E-on marketing! Along side the environments for Clash of the Titans, which I personally worked on. I recall we purchased 35 Vue nodes on the farm and after lengthy testing, we canned any attempts to work with it due to unrealistic render times, noise etc. E-on's marketing team get news of a project using Vue and suddenly they slap Vue logo's over the hero environment shots; it's a little cheap. Though on the plus side; people buy into it, this sells their software, and one day we might have a tool that actually works well, and Vue has the potential.


Source: http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=2&t=1325420

To be fair..I think...most software including lightwave points to a movie or series been made, and also sometimes accompanied by a poster.
What you should look at is the spotlight section where they go in to more detail around exactly how vue was used with interviews.
http://www.e-onsoftware.com/showcase/spotlights/

vue used for backgrounds in the curious case of benjamin button, for indiana jones and the chrystal skull (forest vista scenes when the car races on cliffside) australia for backgrounds, of course avatar for some background skies I believe and also some forest vistas, and Rob Powers used it with lightwave to do previz I think.
the list goes on and on ...for terminator salvation they used ecosystem and bought city parts from cornoccopia to make the city.
Spartacus war of the damned did get some vue environment


Terragen has their own showcase, to me it looks a bit like terragen has been employed more and more over the latest years, and thus catching up against vue for some reason..here it is in fact planetsid who is smacking up their posters
http://planetside.co.uk/galleries/tg-in-film

..but they do not have interview showcase as e-on has with details on exactly how it was used.

I think it would be better for us customers if we reallly knew how much and in detail how the software was used, of course..it could be a lesser good marketing trick in some cases.


Terragen, terranova, used also in oblivion for some terrain scenes.

m.d.
12-12-2015, 09:44 AM
Both these tools are seldom used in films in their full 3D capacity....

Primarily used in film to make 2.5d matte paintings from their renders. Plates projected in 2d with a 3D camera move.

They are not revolutionary in render quality or tech that can't be reproduced by a combination of other tools, and both their render speeds are horrendous in comparison to modern renders.

Almost all big VFX films have huge R&D budgets and will write their own hair and fur systems etc for almost every successive movie they do.
Avatar 2 has spent $150 million on software/hardware R&D....(developing underwater mocap in the process)

To put that in perspective, Avid sold Softimage to AD for $30 million

If a major VFX film needs a feature integrated into maya or Houdini or their own proprietary systems, they will just code their own....rather then fight with quality issues or render times.

The only great thing about Vue and TG, is all the tools are in 1 place. They are dedicated landscape generation tools that make it easy for even an amateur to make a decent image.

Vue is better for the amateur with more presets, better populations and better UI, Terragen does have some enviable atmospherics and terrain but it takes a lot of know how to squeeze it out of it.

kadri
12-12-2015, 11:16 AM
More or less i think the same as you m.d.

Here is the IMDB page of Matt Fairclough, Founder and Lead Developer of Terragen.
He uses his own software in movies (not sure to how much degree) and makes some features because of his own needs too so far i know:

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1232297/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1

Here is a thread where he explains how the 100th Anniversary reimagining of the Paramount Pictures logo was created.
Kind of related and nice making of info (2.page) :

http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,13692.msg134635.html#msg134635

Another example:
http://planetside.co.uk/galleries/featured-projects/3-tg2-tron-legacy

kadri
12-12-2015, 11:32 AM
I don't know anything about Terragen 4 but one of the more critical Alpha users
that wasn't so fond of the changes from version 2 to 3 said in the forum that 4 is a worthwhile upgrade.
Curious what we will get.

m.d.
12-12-2015, 12:10 PM
Pretty impressive for a guy to have a successful VFX career and be a software developer at the same time.

And ya I expect some big things from TG4

prometheus
12-12-2015, 01:03 PM
Just downloaded terragen 3 demo and testing.

sure the terrain microtriangulated detail is nicer than vue, ..you could of course go with the infinite procedural terrain in vue to match it...would be quite slow as well.
general sky and lighting quality is in my opinion better in terragen, as well as cloud fractals perhaps.

just testing the localized clouds in terragen which is nice....but man, still the same, I just canīt stand the slow previewer waiting minutes for the cloud to go through the iteration process to better quality in the previewer, that is one of the main reasons I havenīt tried it out so much..it take so much time to tweak things.
If they boost that up at least 10 times or so, and also the final renderer, it will become interesting.

kadri
12-12-2015, 02:03 PM
By the way m.d. some of the last things you said before my post reminded me about this interview about "Tron Legacy":
"Then of course came the atmosphere in which we used Terragen and hired Matt Fairclough (the creator of the software)
to write custom code in order for us to achieve the look and highly art directed look that we forced the artists to achieve.
And again, since it was stereo all that volumetric atmosphere had to really be there in that volume. It consisted of layers and layers of rendered and simulated clouds."

From here :
http://www.artofvfx.com/tron-legacy-chris-harvey-superviseur-vfx-prime-focus/

Some of the layer features and other changes in Terragen 3 are from here probably.


Michael i don't hold my breath about a 10 fold increase in speed...even 2 times would be great for me.
I think we will see your "slow" comments about Terragen a little longer. But there is hope of course :D

prometheus
12-12-2015, 02:10 PM
By the way m.d. some of the last things you said before my post reminded me about this interview about "Tron Legacy":
"Then of course came the atmosphere in which we used Terragen and hired Matt Fairclough (the creator of the software)
to write custom code in order for us to achieve the look and highly art directed look that we forced the artists to achieve.
And again, since it was stereo all that volumetric atmosphere had to really be there in that volume. It consisted of layers and layers of rendered and simulated clouds."

From here :
http://www.artofvfx.com/tron-legacy-chris-harvey-superviseur-vfx-prime-focus/

Some of the layer features and other changes in Terragen 3 are from here probably.


Michael i don't hold my breath about a 10 fold increase in speed...even 2 times would be great for me.
I think we will see your "slow" comments about Terragen a little longer. But there is hope of course :D

..oki, 5 times then? and it will still be slower than vue previewer I reckon, and even slower than hv volumetrics in VPR..though you canīt compare hvīs with fully infinite cloud procedurals and the full spectral volumetric atmosphere.
Looking forward to see the speed enhancements on lightwaveīs upcoming volumetrics..it will still not compare to a full sky/cloud model though.

Yeah..I will complain on Terragen preview slowness each time I test a new release that is said to be enhanced with speed..but still no real speed improvement on the previewer...in fact..I am suspicious about the new terragen 4 too to be nothing of value in terms of the preview speed enhancement, just a gut feeling...I hope I am wrong about it though...that is what we should hope for, speed improvements...not me stop whining about it :)

when it reaches something like this in speed, that will be nice...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6PDjQdPyus

kadri
12-12-2015, 02:38 PM
I am more optimistic about the previewer Michael.
We might see maybe much faster previews.
Not sure about the renderer. But some of the comments keeps me hopeful at least to a degree.

My main problem in my ongoing short animation project was speed actually.
I lost a lot of time because of long render times in that i saw a problem or didn't liked what i made and rerendered several times.
The lightwave parts where maximum 1 hours per frame or so depending on the scene while Terragen was sometimes 6 hours.
I really saw the first time how the artistic side can be limited because of this.
After a while i settled with so so parts in Terragen and tried much more postwork while i could do adjustments and rerender Lightwave parts much more frequently.
If Terragen render speed was faster i would have tried to rerendering some scenes ones again.
Anyway.It was still a great experience.

m.d.
12-12-2015, 03:57 PM
just testing the localized clouds in terragen which is nice....but man, still the same, I just canīt stand the slow previewer waiting minutes for the cloud to go through the iteration process to better quality in the previewer, that is one of the main reasons I havenīt tried it out so much..it take so much time to tweak things.
If they boost that up at least 10 times or so, and also the final renderer, it will become interesting.

Just FYI...
the localized clouds have a speed boost in the pro version you wont see in the free version....it's listed on the features comparison page. Although it is probably not the scale of speed up you are looking for....

try using the renderer instead...and lower the detail to like .3 etc....and use the limited region.


not disagreeing it's slow....

prometheus
12-12-2015, 05:05 PM
Just FYI...
the localized clouds have a speed boost in the pro version you wont see in the free version....it's listed on the features comparison page. Although it is probably not the scale of speed up you are looking for....

try using the renderer instead...and lower the detail to like .3 etc....and use the limited region.


not disagreeing it's slow....

Yes..I am doing that, starting the renderer after a few iterations in the previewer.
I noticed in the terragen 3 version, my renders are closing after it is finished, it didnīt do that in version2...but I canīt find the setting to stop that from happening..tedious to go to window show renderer each time.

kadri
12-12-2015, 08:17 PM
Yes..I am doing that, starting the renderer after a few iterations in the previewer.
I noticed in the terragen 3 version, my renders are closing after it is finished, it didnīt do that in version2...
but I canīt find the setting to stop that from happening..tedious to go to window show renderer each time.

I haven't seen that kind of problem.Not sure what is happening.
Can you use at least the F3 shortcut key temporary?
Asking at the Terragen forum might help.

m.d.
12-13-2015, 02:20 AM
ya...not experiencing those issues either....glitch?

erikals
12-13-2015, 05:01 AM
what about World Machine + LW2016... ?
HyperVoxel clouds seems great in LW2016 (we'll have to wait and see)

http://www.world-machine.com/download.php?page=buy
http://planetside.co.uk/products/tg3-product-comparison

Terragen Pro is required to get cloud animation $500
Vue light version, VUE Esprit needs an exporter and ends up at $350


mostly interested in terrain export, choosing between WM / Terragen seems tricky

prometheus
12-13-2015, 05:47 AM
what about World Machine + LW2016... ?

edit, i see World Machine raised price... hmm...

http://www.world-machine.com/download.php?page=buy
http://planetside.co.uk/products/tg3-product-comparison

Terragen Pro is required to get cloud animation $500

world machine would help a bit, though, though I reckon microdisplacements will be needed in lightwave to compete maybe with very detailed terrain...Lino said they are keeping an eye on microdisplacements I think...but that doesnīt necessary
mean it will arrive in the first 2016 version.

the new volumetrics will help with mostly large hero clouds, but not sure it will be suitable for larger global cloudscapes, then we are still missing a true volumetric spectral style of atmosphere.

had a few hours to test terragen3, I love the realism of the light in the environment and atmosphere, cloud fractals are by default often looking good...though they are harder too tweak then vueīs..then again vue has lesser good fractals by default for clouds.

Dropped terragen 3 after some hours...was getting frustrated with the lack of speed and feedback when tweaking clouds...tried vue ple again..and that was a relief...even though it may not have equal realism quality...I can work with it in a decent and acceptable way.

Still none of the software is giving me enough satisfaction..neither terragen, vue or lightwave, always something missing...reckon that is always the case, but I would wish for some limitations in all those three software to be gone in a near future.

erikals
12-13-2015, 06:00 AM
Even on micro overhang...this becomes an issue. Canyon walls beyond vertical cliffs, caves....even divots in the sides of a rock are all a no go. Would have a hard time fixing those details with LW brush.
Vector displacement would be the way to go....if you can get the map...zbrush can output it, not sure of any others though
131431

for big objects i'd tweak it in Modeler,
for big rocks etc i'd use Advanced Placement

agree, it'd be nice to see Vector displacement and correct texture maps in these packages

prometheus
12-13-2015, 07:56 AM
There is one factor alone that lightwave can not pull off without external plugins, that is the volumetric atmosphere..thereīs no way around that, working with terrain ..sure go modeler or displacement or use worldmachine..or heightmaps, or sculpt with free sculptris or use zbrush, vegetation..sure instance dp-trees, tree designer trees, xfrog trees etc..that works..all those stuff will be able to be put in to lightwave for render results that migth match up most of the landscape softwares out there...but the volumetric/spectral atmosphere with fog and sunlight with soft shadows...no, and sorry to say that ozone wonīt work for me..ogo taiki to darn slow for final renders.

So my NO 1 wish for environments in lightwave, that would be such atmosphere engine with fog and proper volumetric sunlight with soft shadows ..And infinite procedural cloudplanes.
The rest is more about enhancing the landscape terrain and vegetation tools, as well as material presets and shader...but without the option of being able to produce realistic skyscapes it would in the end lead to a look at the landscape software capable of doing that.
Of course this is all depends on what you need for a shot or still etc, the old tricks of using real background photage is of course an advantage if you got such assets and it matches the rest of the scenes, but if you want to completly design the skyscape as you wish with all interactivity and light matching...then we need that atmosphere engine.

The new volumetrics in lightwave will be an enhancement as mentioned, but I donīt think it will be able to produce such atmospherics I want in the end...I could be wrong if they indeed are working on that now..but I donīt think so.

Michael

Marander
12-13-2015, 08:49 AM
I don't think it's just about simple landscape geometry and shaders. Vue (and I guess Terragen) have complex algorithms with various input parameters (besides altitude and slope), e.g. for some materials there are parameters like Wind, Frost etc.

These are quick renders with only one infinite landscape. Just after trying couple of hours in Vue XStream

131443

131444

131441

131442

prometheus
12-13-2015, 09:07 AM
I don't think it's just about simple landscape geometry and shaders. Vue (and I guess Terragen) have complex algorithms with various input parameters (besides altitude and slope), e.g. for some materials there are parameters like Wind, Frost etc.

These are quick renders with only one infinite landscape. Just after trying couple of hours in Vue.

131441

131443

131444

well itīs not, but you can get close to the terrain results, if you would add microdisplacements, or use a very high res dense mesh, also use normal maps...bu depends on if you wanīt that detail to keep itīs resolution when zooming in with the camera right to the surface or not....with that said I think you can get very close in terrain, you would have to approach it differently but the end result may be acheivable for terrain...same goes with shaders, in lightwave we miss altitude and some other parameters...wind frost I havenīt seen in vue? but I am using older version of vue, reckon I need to download the latest vue ple.

What you can not match is the atmospheric engine..I would gladely see improvements on terrain as microdisplacement or procedural infinite terrain, as well as the workflow of sculpting the terrain in layout..but that will be secondary after a true atmospheric engine.

worklflow improvments could be a geometric terrain which you click on in layout..and it will make a subdiv plane with a procedural terrainf fractal already applied..includin zero edge premade with some sort of falloff curve, and then some easy acess to the fractal to change scaling of the fractals etc.
Next microdisplacement or surface displacement ala octane, or some sort of procedural infinite terrain...would be nice.


Ogo taiki has a surface mode to match that of vue infinite terrain...purely volumetric surface mode with infinite detail, though extremly slow and not very practical due to that reason...I do not now exactly how it is employed in vue..if thereīs freezing to polygons or if it is purely volumetric...infinite terrains in vue are slow too...but not as slow as I perceived ogo taikiīs surface mode was...a bit tragic that it hasnīt been developed further and enhanced optimized..needs foremost renderspeed boost on the atmosphere and then the surface terrain..then some minor ui and aa quality fixes, with all that in place it could have rocked really.



http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~pq1a-ogs/land2.jpg http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~pq1a-ogs/land4.jpg

kadri
12-13-2015, 09:38 AM
In the past i used mostly only Lightwave.
The main reason i begun to use Terragen was the lighting-atmospheric engine.
It is so easy to get nice results with minimum effort.
Terragen does have other strengths (a planetary global approach with great displacement capability etc.).
But if Lightwave had a similar atmospheric engine (even local would be enough) you could make most what Terragen can
+what it lacks like better object surfacing,better animation capabilities etc.
Yea that would be great

prometheus
12-13-2015, 09:45 AM
In the past i used mostly only Lightwave.
The main reason i begun to use Terragen was the lighting-atmospheric engine.
It is so easy to get nice results with minimum effort.
Terragen does have other strengths (a planetary global approach with great displacement capability etc.).
But if Lightwave had a similar atmospheric engine (even local would be enough) you could make most what Terragen can
+what it lacks like better object surfacing,better animation capabilities etc.
Yea that would be great

ogo taiki is the closest maybe..sure ozone is there, but you can not use it to tweak in vpr, only se the results after tweak in vpr..and I had issues with shadows and fog not working properly, and you can not go planetary mode with ozone...ogo taiki can, and also has the heat shimmer option with air refraction.

planet zoom out...


http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~pq1a-ogs/taiki2.mpg

ogo taiki can also use particles for smoke effects or cloud clusters, neither terragen or vue can do that.

kadri
12-13-2015, 10:04 AM
...and you can not go planetary mode with ozone...ogo taiki can, and also has the heat shimmer option with air refraction.
planet zoom out...
...


Is that a real planetary mode? I didn't know it can do that. I thought the atmospheric capability was local.

Marander
12-13-2015, 10:07 AM
Yes the ogo taiki sounds interesting. Anyway I have enough to play the next couple of months :-) About the parameters frost, wind etc. depends what is published from the nodal shading. The frost / wind / freeze / melt example is from a 3rd party material, but the built-in ones have also their own like cracks etc. (see screenshots). About infinite landscapes, I find them very fast! And in the latest version of Vue (at least in XStream) there is AVX acceleration for modern cpu's which increases render times by 40%. But I found there is lots of tweaking to do for the render quality and speed.

131445

131446

131447

131448

m.d.
12-13-2015, 11:45 AM
Terragen Pro is required to get cloud animation $500
Vue light version, VUE Esprit needs an exporter and ends up at $350


mostly interested in terrain export, choosing between WM / Terragen seems tricky

WM more powerful terrain

TG cloud animation can be had in Creative+anim version....$299
only other option is pro+anim....$599

prometheus
12-14-2015, 09:38 AM
Is that a real planetary mode? I didn't know it can do that. I thought the atmospheric capability was local.

not sure to call it real planetary mode, but if you move the cam up, it will act as such with earth radius...not sure it is capable of producing other planetary items within that volumetric engine though, do not think so, so there terragen might be of better use, unless going for lightwave spherical objects without the need to fly in to the planet or fly off the planet that is.

http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~pq1a-ogs/taiki_e.html


http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~pq1a-ogs/taiki4.jpg http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~pq1a-ogs/planet1.jpg

kadri
12-14-2015, 10:21 AM
I see. Kind of an inbetween mode if that makes sense.But still looks very useful.

Greenlaw
12-14-2015, 11:02 AM
I've been using Vue Xstream and Infinite for several years.

The first time I used it extensively was at R+H to create environments from an in-house Halo cinematic for Microsoft. At the time, it represented one of our best 'shorts' but, sadly, MS never released it publicly because the actual game was released about two years later and apparently the designs had significantly changed by then. Oh, well. But with regards to Vue, I mainly used it for creating 3D matte paintings.

After that, we started using it for full environment animation. We started out using it on several smaller productions and POC projects, but where we really got to take advantage of Vue was in the Fable: The Journey E3 trailer. That was four years ago and we used LightWave 10 and Vue 9.5.:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtbsPGGt1XQ

Most of the really deep environment stuff is towards the end in the forest.

What was awesome about using Vue on this production was that I learned I could exports z-coverage data, which means I can use any of its channel buffers in Fusion with full anti-aliasing--automatically! This is especially cool with Material and Object IDs because, let's say I wanted to change the color of the pine cones on a certain species of tree. All I had to to was click a single pine cone with a mask eyedropper and I would have a perfect anti-aliased mask for all the pine cones in the scene. If I wanted to constrain the selection to only the pine cones on a single tree, I just enabled the object ID for that tree. There were a few hoops to jump through: you could only get z-coverage if you rendered it with an RPF, so we rendered both and EXR for all channels and RPF specifically for Z-coverage, and then we merged the Z-coverage with out EXR in Fusion and rendered out a new EXR. Then, we deleted the RPF version because these files were insanely huge. It was totally worth it though because the data made compositing this job so much easier. (Since then, I've been hoping LW3DG would add this channel to Lightwave's export buffers. Still waiting.)

Vue also has a nice compositing layers system. For example, you could select objects and group them by FG, MG and BG layers and render these layers as separate passes--no manually setting up multiple scene files like with LightWave.

Rendering was pretty fast too...maybe 20 minutes to a little over an hour per frame. I should point out that we rarely used the Xstream plugin--it was usually faster to just import the LightWave camera to Vue and use the native Vue renderer instead. (Vue Xstream and Infinite comes bundled with 5 'Render Cows'.)

All that said, I came close to letting my Vue Infinite subscription expire this year because I have to confess, I've hardly used Vue in the past two years. At the last minute, I renewed though because I'm really going to need it for our next short film but that's probably not going to start till next spring, so maintaining the sub has been a bit annoying to say the least. I know that's my responsibility and not E-on's but still...

Anyway, in the past I kinda dismissed Terragen but this new release has me interested again. While I still really like using Vue, the quality of the Terragen 4 renders I'm seeing and the fact that it's not requiring a subscription may possibly get me to switch next year. Will be keeping an eye on it's development.

G.

prometheus
12-14-2015, 11:57 AM
Thanks for the feedback Greenlaw.

No doubt vue is a great tool for mattepaintings and cg environments, if used right (lotsa tweaking and understanding of the atmosphere and lighting) you can get very close to terragen quality I think...and with vue it comes with a much faster previewer ..and a much easier to work with UI..but it comes at a cost, so it will take some time to put aside it, and I also need to be 100% sure of that I would like to focus on landscape scenery to justify that.
meanwhile I need to spend even more time with the latest ple versions, and keep an eye on a demo for the terragen4 version, one thing is probably for sure though...if it still shows no significant improvement on the previewer, then I think itīs time to leave it for another time.

sadkkf
12-14-2015, 12:29 PM
ogo taiki can also use particles for smoke effects or cloud clusters, neither terragen or vue can do that.

That's not exactly right. You can use Vue particles to create fires, tornadoes, clouds, etc. Their particle system is awful, but you can apply a volumetric material to it to simulate those things. No idea about Terragen. :)

I think overall Vue is great tool and can produce some very photorealistic results. The problem is there are so many controls that need tweaking to get these results and the default settings are absurd.

I bought Vue 11 Complete a few years ago and vowed never to upgrade until I felt comfortable enough with the settings to produce good results. I'm getting there, but still a way off.

Turns out it wasn't a bad decision since E-On had the same mentality of Adobe by offering minimal changes with each upgrade so I don't feel I'm missing out on much. No word yet if their new owners will follow that policy.

prometheus
12-15-2015, 03:06 AM
That's not exactly right. You can use Vue particles to create fires, tornadoes, clouds, etc. Their particle system is awful, but you can apply a volumetric material to it to simulate those things. No idea about Terragen. :)

I think overall Vue is great tool and can produce some very photorealistic results. The problem is there are so many controls that need tweaking to get these results and the default settings are absurd.

I bought Vue 11 Complete a few years ago and vowed never to upgrade until I felt comfortable enough with the settings to produce good results. I'm getting there, but still a way off.

Turns out it wasn't a bad decision since E-On had the same mentality of Adobe by offering minimal changes with each upgrade so I don't feel I'm missing out on much. No word yet if their new owners will follow that policy.


Stand corrected..I forgot that about vue eco particles, havenīt tested them or seen any smoke or billowing cloud samples..so I guess thatīs why it slipped my attention.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oW0ImR2zZ9M

zapper1998
12-15-2015, 07:36 AM
Can you still buy that plugin???

I know I did a few years back, but never received a conformation email.

my CC statement showed the billing for it. I emailed him a few times... that was a few years ago..




Mike

kadri
12-15-2015, 07:42 AM
Thanks for the detailed post Greenlaw.
Had you time to look at the Layer node in Terragen?
I have used it in a very basic way only really.
Just curious what you think.

sadkkf
12-15-2015, 09:03 AM
Stand corrected..I forgot that about vue eco particles, havenīt tested them or seen any smoke or billowing cloud samples..so I guess thatīs why it slipped my attention.

No big deal. Vue particles, as I said, are terrible. Rendering any of their volumetric materials takes far too long.

I've actually gotten some nice clouds using procedurals, but, again, render times are insane.

kadri
12-15-2015, 10:04 AM
Not sure if you will find this interesting but i used Terragen clouds for this image in my short animation project.
I don't like modeling much and used image masks (some are over 20.000 x 20.000 if i remember right) for this.
These are only many cloud layers masked with those images. No polygons.
Took very long to render because of those many cloud layers and to get less flickering for animation.
This is not the final by the way

131463

erikals
12-15-2015, 11:48 AM
Can you still buy that plugin???
I know I did a few years back, but never received a conformation email.
my CC statement showed the billing for it. I emailed him a few times... that was a few years ago..
Mike
as far as i remember, Mike Green bought it some years ago, worked fine.

now however, you might wanna experiment with the new LW2016 HyperVoxels instead
good blending, and receives Radiosity, and 64bit

once i get LW2016, i'll be moving away from Ogo Taiki

prometheus
12-15-2015, 12:08 PM
as far as i remember, Mike Green bought it some years ago, worked fine.

now however, you might wanna experiment with the new LW2016 HyperVoxels instead
good blending, and receives Radiosity, and 64bit

once i get LW2016, i'll be moving away from Ogo Taiki

Im afraid it will only take you so far, and by that I mean much better and faster hero clouds, donīt think it can be applied as infinite cloud layers, possible it may work decently to add several volumetric items spread out, that will not make it useful for animated cloud layers moving though, particles might work as I have done with hvīs and particles..If the blending mode is better, but it may pose some issues of cloud translate/fluctuation not being realistic anyway.

would like a true textured based volumetric infinite procedural layers.

even if the new volumetric voxels are faster better...we are still missing a true volumetric fog layer and sunlight casting soft sampled shadows.
Now that is only my reflections on what we have seen so far, if they work hard and has that on the agenda..who knows if they can pull that off with more atmospherics going on.

prometheus
12-15-2015, 12:10 PM
Not sure if you will find this interesting but i used Terragen clouds for this image in my short animation project.
I don't like modeling much and used image masks (some are over 20.000 x 20.000 if i remember right) for this.
These are only many cloud layers masked with those images. No polygons.
Took very long to render because of those many cloud layers and to get less flickering for animation.
This is not the final by the way

131463

yes interesting to see tools used as they may not be intended too, though as you said..long rendertimes, I would probably look in to microdisplacements or get octane and itīs surface displacement and map patterns with that.

kadri
12-15-2015, 12:38 PM
...I would probably look in to microdisplacements or get octane and itīs surface displacement and map patterns with that.
That was kind of a test to see what i can do.I thought about using instancing in Lightwave etc. too.
Octane looks great.But the interface looked kinda alien to me when i tried the demo.
But i want to try it later ones again.
As a hobby i can not-don't want to buy more software so much i can.

kadri
12-15-2015, 12:41 PM
By the way do you get email notices of new posts from this forum Michael?
Since a long time i don't get any and lost the will to look into it and only pin the threads in the browser for a certain time.

prometheus
12-15-2015, 01:00 PM
By the way do you get email notices of new posts from this forum Michael?
Since a long time i don't get any and lost the will to look into it and only pin the threads in the browser for a certain time.

No..I do not get any email notices since several months ago, I have given up on reacting on it though..sadly it means I sometimes miss reply to forum topics, and I am also replying much slower..meaning hours or a day after someone is posting instead of a few minutes after.

as hobbiest...look in to using blender more if you havenīt already.

kadri
12-15-2015, 01:09 PM
Yeah it is bad to use the forum without email notices.

I use Lightwave since 20 years and will rather pay to use it (and others) then using Blender...at least until i can owercome that user interface.
Still no luck...maybe 1 year later with my next try :)

Greenlaw
12-15-2015, 02:22 PM
That was kind of a test to see what i can do.I thought about using instancing in Lightwave etc. too.
Interesting you should say that. At an earlier stage in 'B2', I had intended to use Vue Infinite for the cemetery environment because of Vue's ability to handle tons of geometry via instancing. But before I got around to setting it up, LightWave got its own native instancing system and I decided to give that a shot. Since 'photorealism' wasn't really important to me, I figured what the heck. To my surprise, LightWave (11.5 at the time) handled this environment much better than I expected and my environments took only minutes per frame to render. And because LightWave's Instancer outputs motion vector data, I saved a ton of time over using the old HD_Instance system.

I wound up using Vue only to render the clouds in two shots in the brief excerpt. I think I will still use Vue for at least two other shots at the end of the music video, but otherwise this project is being done almost entirely in LightWave.


Had you time to look at the Layer node in Terragen?
I have used it in a very basic way only really.
Just curious what you think.

I'm very curious about Terragen but haven't used it in production. Frankly, I don't presently have the bandwidth to learn and work with a new landscape program but I'll be keeping an eye on its development.

G.

kadri
12-15-2015, 02:41 PM
Thanks Greenlaw.

erikals
12-15-2015, 06:24 PM
while at it, terrain inspiration >


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZ9UGFsWexM

kadri
12-15-2015, 07:20 PM
Yes it looks good and i will look probably more for what they have done in the background then the story (not that Pixar is bad at that :) ).

m.d.
12-15-2015, 07:23 PM
I'm very curious about Terragen but haven't used it in production. Frankly, I don't presently have the bandwidth to learn and work with a new landscape program but I'll be keeping an eye on its development.

G.

You need that pill thingy from that movie show, bout dumb guy that eats pill thing and gets better at thinking.
I'm waiting for mine to kick in....

prometheus
12-16-2015, 02:13 AM
Yeah it is bad to use the forum without email notices.

I use Lightwave since 20 years and will rather pay to use it (and others) then using Blender...at least until i can owercome that user interface.
Still no luck...maybe 1 year later with my next try :)

Yeah..same here, as soon as I get a little time..I will actually give blender ago again, I just met a young guy out of school not long ago and he is now unemployed and he wantīs to work with gaming, though he canīt afford buying software here and there, so he uses blender and he might be able to work with autodesk student licenses later..but for now he uses blender and he just donīt get why blender isnīt more used and accepted, since it can do so much other software can ..and in some cases even more, all for free except for special addons.

for me I never got comfortable with the blender UI, this guy thought that was just a question of getting used to it..then it actually is nice to work with, not sure about that but I will try.

prometheus
12-16-2015, 02:19 AM
while at it, terrain inspiration >


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZ9UGFsWexM

whooa...that is sweet, I got to go and see this, cute movie, and some really interesting new (inhouse) tech for clouds etc, that we wonīt be getting our hands on that easy...looks awesome, and extraced from real cloud data for some parts.. huh.

Thanks for the link on that.

kadri
12-16-2015, 09:03 PM
Matt said in the Planetside forum after a question about this today that the new atmosphere system will now have real Subsurface Scattering in the clouds.
The clouds were already nice... eager to play with the new ones.

zapper1998
12-17-2015, 08:51 AM
Tinkering with Terragen yesterday.. wow slow and sluggish on the 64 bit workstation.. still a clunky program.. still trying to figure out how to get anywhere...
should probably spend more time with it..
World Machine is fast and responsive compared to terragen.. hmmm

kadri
12-17-2015, 09:06 AM
Terragen is slow from rendering and previewer aspect and i don't expect much improvement in that way but not sure quite what you mean with sluggish or clunky?
It is maybe one of the most stable programs i used and you can throw anything you have at it like very very big image files, objects etc. so much RAM you have.
Comparing World Machine to Terragen isn't fair.They are very different programs. If you said Vue (like Michael :) ) yes,not much to say there.

prometheus
12-17-2015, 10:09 AM
Matt said in the Planetside forum after a question about this today that the new atmosphere system will now have real Subsurface Scattering in the clouds.
The clouds were already nice... eager to play with the new ones.

will be interesting to see the realism on that...though we should expect even more slower renders if that option is on ..that is what I suspect, just hope they in such case has an option to turn it off..probably they will have.


Tinkering with Terragen yesterday.. wow slow and sluggish on the 64 bit workstation.. still a clunky program.. still trying to figure out how to get anywhere...
should probably spend more time with it..
World Machine is fast and responsive compared to terragen.. hmmm

as mentioned...you can not compare it like that..itīs two different things, worldmachine is only a terrain creator editor, and if you think about it...world machine in fact slower, with that I mean remember that you have to build your terrain..and how long does that take? not just use it after the building..thats a different story...and teh building is even slower than the mesh generation and rendering in terragen.

the previewer in terragen is however discustingly slow in my opinion...letīs hope for a better one in the next version 4.

kadri
12-17-2015, 10:20 AM
will be interesting to see the realism on that...though we should expect even more slower renders if that option is on ..that is what I suspect, just hope they in such case has an option to turn it off..probably they will have.
...

I think it will be the same as you said.

JohnMarchant
12-17-2015, 11:48 AM
I've always found Terragen fairly solid to and handles some large files. Clouds and stuff are pretty good as well. World Machine is not really comparing like for like really.

However i will say that i think planetside's pricing system now has gone a little on the steep side if you want all the bells and whistles, after all its good but its not Vue.

m.d.
12-17-2015, 01:39 PM
Matt said in the Planetside forum after a question about this today that the new atmosphere system will now have real Subsurface Scattering in the clouds.
The clouds were already nice... eager to play with the new ones.

to be clear he never said they would have 'sub surface scattering'....someone implied that and he said yes...and Oshyan clarified that sub surface scattering is very different from cloud scattering....

either way...greater cloud realism

prometheus
12-17-2015, 02:10 PM
the vue external plugin Helios added subvapor scattering for clouds, unfortunatly he posted this on his blogs, not in the helios feature pages...
http://www.daxpandhi.com/post/Understanding-Helios-1

from what I can see..it is easier to acheive cloud softness at the edges of the cloud volume, it scatters light very nicely...and a completly new set of fractal functions for cloudlets...
what I didnīt like about how helios works..except for being expensive...In his presentation he is doing the cloud preview updates with a manual button apply, that I do not like, if you do changes I would like to have an option to either manually do it as shown..Or have it autoupdate the previewer once I have changed a setting.

http://www.quadspinner.com/Helios/Index

To bad one can not test it I think...would be nice if one could test it with one of the vue ple versions...with a small watermark and perhaps a render resolution limit, but otherwise almost fully working for anyone able to test it properly anyway...without giving it away in a manner that allows for commercial work.

kadri
12-17-2015, 02:20 PM
to be clear he never said they would have 'sub surface scattering'....someone implied that and he said yes...and Oshyan clarified that sub surface scattering is very different from cloud scattering....
either way...greater cloud realism
Yes it was about the atmo only. Then the poster made a wishful assumption. Oshyan's reply looks like it will be only for the clouds.

m.d.
12-17-2015, 11:17 PM
Well.....it appears the preview window now has a major upgrade coming....

http://youtu.be/WjufUZp6cTA

CaptainMarlowe
12-17-2015, 11:30 PM
Nice...

prometheus
12-18-2015, 06:50 AM
That is sweet...but why just show stuff without clouds, that is where you will notice the Preview slow down render hit.

O well..still nice to see it update the rest of the scene as it does, the volumetric light and shadow quality is top notch in realism.

the UI...huh, can they not make the node connections with rubberband or square connections.
they need to do something about the rest of the UI colors as well, get it updated with a bit more "professional look"

Still ..interesting to see something finally happening there with the previewer...if someone shows it with clouds as well, please let me know here:)
Edited...noticed it was uploaded a few hours ago and as a part 1, so maybe they will show the clouds as well in a part 2.

To be aware of, with this "fast" preview demonstration..they should make it clear to their customers..on which system they are showcasing it on, hardware etc.

m.d.
12-18-2015, 08:26 AM
If you look in the video at the top of the preview window....it says "threads running 26" (or 28....I'm on my phone)

Likely dual Xeon....

But this is only a preview, still working on it....and they are looking at GPU implementation

m.d.
12-18-2015, 11:12 AM
That is sweet...but why just show stuff without clouds

You and your clouds....its always about the clouds isn't it :santa:

prometheus
12-18-2015, 11:46 AM
You and your clouds....its always about the clouds isn't it :santa:
Maybe you haven't been keeping up on current events? :D

Not always...but mostly...also meatballs :D ...especially at christmas time...in fact I am having myself some meatballs within a couple of minutes now..yum.
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?147182-The-Almost-very-powerful-polyline-to-mesh-technique-metaedges-objects-info-provided&highlight=polylines

But yeah..itīs safe to say, Hi my name is Michael...and I am a cloudyholic:D I can stare for clouds for almost hours..always been extremly fascinated of clouds.


Anyway..got an answer from planetside...

"+PrometheusPhamarus I think you'll be pleasantly surprised when you see what it's like to work with clouds now. We'll be showing more of that soon. Regarding the specs, here's our Software Architect's response on Facebook: "This video was recorded on a Dual E5-2630 v3 @ 2.4GHz. It remains interactive on slower systems too, just taking longer to refine to a certain level of quality. Much of the code was written and tested on a 3-year-old Core i7 (2600 @ 3.4GHz) with 12 Gb and it performs well on that machine too. "

kadri
12-18-2015, 12:16 PM
The previewer announcement surprised me...kinda...as i said i was expecting more speed improvement in that aspect then in the renderer.
Just curious how much speed improvement i will get on my own I7 2600K system. A computer upgrade will get much more speed improvement probably...

m.d.
12-18-2015, 04:39 PM
Just curious how much speed improvement i will get on my own I7 2600K system. A computer upgrade will get much more speed improvement probably...

I recently buckled down and spent 2 days overclocking my system to a safe stable setting.
Gained 20% clock speed improvement on a 6core i7 with a cheap water cooler for the proc.....and my temps are maxing out at 65c on the processors.

That translates into 20% rendering improvement....may not seem like much, but I did some 96 hour renders a few months back....20% would have saved me 18 hours

m.d.
12-18-2015, 04:42 PM
But yeah..itīs safe to say, Hi my name is Michael...and I am a cloudyholic:D I can stare for clouds for almost hours..always been extremly fascinated of clouds.


Thank you for sharing Michael....this is a safe space :)

kadri
12-18-2015, 05:02 PM
I recently buckled down and spent 2 days overclocking my system to a safe stable setting.
Gained 20% clock speed improvement on a 6core i7 with a cheap water cooler for the proc.....and my temps are maxing out at 65c on the processors.
That translates into 20% rendering improvement....may not seem like much, but I did some 96 hour renders a few months back....20% would have saved me 18 hours

I had always problems regarding overclocking. So in the last 2-3 years i haven't even tried it.
I have not a watercooler but one of the strange looking big fans that is probably only looking "cool" or "silly" regarding who you ask and dooing nothing.
Still i might have another go ones more maybe. Could get from 3.4 to 3.8 easily at least...

m.d.
12-18-2015, 06:19 PM
I had always problems regarding overclocking. So in the last 2-3 years i haven't even tried it.
I have not a watercooler but one of the strange looking big ones that is probably only looking "cool" or "silly" regarding who you ask and dooing nothing.
Still i might have another go ones more maybe. Could get from 3.4 to 3.8 easily at least...

it is slightly complicated now, compared to years ago when only the FSB had to be overclocked and a little extra voltage....

I took mine from 3.3 ghz to 4.1....little effort
If you want, your MB manufacturer usually has overclocking software that is probably good for 10-15% overclock....any more and you need to be diving into the BIOS

here is a simple guide...you do need a good 4hrs+ to do it...but that can be made up on your first render

http://www.overclockers.com/3-step-guide-overclock-core-i3-i5-i7/

these water coolers are CPU only....come pre-filled and maintenance free, and they lower your temps considerably
http://www.corsair.com/en-ca/hydro-series-h60-high-performance-liquid-cpu-cooler

kadri
12-18-2015, 07:21 PM
Thank you.Will have a look at those links.

kadri
12-20-2015, 03:24 PM
Hey Michael and others who may have still the same problem.
I changed my email adress from hotmail to gmail and got my first email notification since months (years?) today.
Hope that was the real problem.

prometheus
12-20-2015, 04:22 PM
Hey Michael and others who may have still the same problem.
I changed my email adress from hotmail to gmail and got my first email notification since months (years?) today.
Hope that was the real problem.

Yes..I think it has something to do with hotmail and how they shut down mail that could be considered spam like, think that was some kind of explanation from newtek too.

though I will not change my mail just for that.

kadri
12-20-2015, 04:34 PM
:)

jwiede
12-20-2015, 09:22 PM
I recently buckled down and spent 2 days overclocking my system to a safe stable setting.
Gained 20% clock speed improvement on a 6core i7 with a cheap water cooler for the proc.....and my temps are maxing out at 65c on the processors.

That translates into 20% rendering improvement....may not seem like much, but I did some 96 hour renders a few months back....20% would have saved me 18 hours

I'll just say that 20% is a bit... aggressive. 10%, perhaps even 15% likely won't have any serious longevity impact, but above that it definitely becomes a possibility. The CPU temp sensors only measure at a single point, and the problem is without specialized equipment it is difficult to detect whether there are hotspots forming (but located far enough away from the sensor that local dissipation prevents them from being reflected in the overall temp). Hotspots impose thermal strain on the substrate, and are known to lead to premature cracking and shortened longevity.

Given the lifespan of CPUs w.r.t. performance has become so much shorter than the expected lifespan of the CPUs themselves, it may not matter, but if you prefer to hold onto your systems for longer periods only upgrading other components, the longevity impact of overclocking is probably worth keeping in mind.

I tend to take the opinion that if you're pursuing >10% overclocking on anything other than a top-of-line CPU model with established history for overclocking stability, you're playing a game of roulette. Just remember, your CPU got in the bin it was in by a speed/stability comparison process in the first place -- if the CPU were truly stable and reliable at higher frequencies, it likely would have been put in a higher-frequency bin (other than, ofc, top-freq binned models). OTOH, if you're okay with potentially replacing your CPU, why not give it a try, but I recommend running _thorough_ tests of stability (checking for errors from ALU & SIMD units in particular) before using it for long-term 3D render production purposes, etc.

m.d.
12-20-2015, 11:59 PM
I am water cooled....temps are lower then stock clock with stock air cooler....I may have micro hotspots, but am so far below Intels design limit its of little consequence


I have worked with overclocked systems for a long time.....a lot of the prebuilt systems for scratch and davinci in the old days were sold overclocked with warranty from BOXX and others....also usually with water cooling

Intel doesn't rate a processor with water coolers in mind......it is factory clocked to be paired with the air cooler they include.

If temperature is under control you have little to worry about.

As far as roulette and binning, it's more a matter of system stability rather then catastrophic failure.....it's very easy to spot when you are exceeding the capability of your particular bin.....they just don't explode and your out a processor. When you reach that level you dial it back.


I respect your opinion of keeping it on the safe side, but never having a processor fail in maybe 20 computers (motherboards, power supplies and video cards have all died) it is worth the small risk for me to potentially beat deadlines by up to 12 hours....
I've probably done at least 1500hrs rendering this year between 3D and video projects....the 20% gain is worth the risk to me.

If the average user wants to play it really safe you can use software overclocking....Intel even has their own application....and keep it dialed back to 10% or so

It's all a matter of perspective....I was honestly bothered I did not overclock this machine earlier, all those free cycles wasted. Substantially more bothered then I now about the increased risk to my system...:)

dickbill
12-23-2015, 07:07 AM
Back to the battle Terragen vs Vue.

1)When we consider the version 'Vue Complete' (animation and export module included) at $599 , it is $200 more expensive than Terragen3 Creative + Animation at 299$ : Vue =0, T3 = 1
2)Vue's volumetrics (clouds, atmosphere) may not be as good as Terragen's : Vue =0, T3 =2
3)Vue is faster though, as witnessed by this thread which derived to CPU cooling issues : Vue = 1, T3 =2
4)T3ca can render with unlimited details: Vue =1, T3 =3
5)Perhaps as a consequence of the above, T3's renderings are amazingly photorealistic: Vue= 1, T3 = 4
6)Export : Vue5 export scene to LW is an amazing feature. Also, Vue may not have the Goz app from zbrush (vue5 doesn't), but LW does. So LW can a bridge between Zbrush and Vue: Vue =2, T3 = 4.

Conclusion : Vue seems better at rendering speed and exporting/echanging than T3, and badder at everything else, including the price, would you agree?
Perhaps it's tight to chose, but the price difference of $200 is a big plus. Vue Studio is more reasonable than Vue complete at 349$, but the Exporter modules ($149) and Animation ($39) will add to about the same as Vue Complete at the end. But even so, Vue Studio bare is still more expensive than T3ca + animation.
By the way, there are no specials for Christmas for Vue, otherwise VueStudio (without anim and export modules) would be exactly the same price as T3ca + animation. But globally, right now, Terragen3 Creative + Animation wins.

Anything else?

prometheus
12-23-2015, 09:54 AM
Back to the battle Terragen vs Vue.

1)When we consider the version 'Vue Complete' (animation and export module included) at $599 , it is $200 more expensive than Terragen3 Creative + Animation at 299$ : Vue =0, T3 = 1
2)Vue's volumetrics (clouds, atmosphere) may not be as good as Terragen's : Vue =0, T3 =2
3)Vue is faster though, as witnessed by this thread which derived to CPU cooling issues : Vue = 1, T3 =2
4)T3ca can render with unlimited details: Vue =1, T3 =3
5)Perhaps as a consequence of the above, T3's renderings are amazingly photorealistic: Vue= 1, T3 = 4
6)Export : Vue5 export scene to LW is an amazing feature. Also, Vue may not have the Goz app from zbrush (vue5 doesn't), but LW does. So LW can a bridge between Zbrush and Vue: Vue =2, T3 = 4.

Conclusion : Vue seems better at rendering speed and exporting/echanging than T3, and badder at everything else, including the price, would you agree?
Perhaps it's tight to chose, but the price difference of $200 is a big plus. Vue Studio is more reasonable than Vue complete at 349$, but the Exporter modules ($149) and Animation ($39) will add to about the same as Vue Complete at the end. But even so, Vue Studio bare is still more expensive than T3ca + animation.
By the way, there are no specials for Christmas for Vue, otherwise VueStudio (without anim and export modules) would be exactly the same price as T3ca + animation. But globally, right now, Terragen3 Creative + Animation wins.

Anything else?


Oh..I will not jump in on either Terragen 4 or vue that soon, will probably take me 6 months to look in to both the new terragen release as well as look in to what is planned for vue...focus will be more
on setting means aside for Lightwave 2016 and some other stuff, plugins etc...testing out blender more, also houdini apprentice if time permits.

One thing though...I enjoy and think itīs fun to use vue ple, that I can not say about terragen..terragen would only be there to get "the job done" but more in a painstakingly work process to get there as opposed to fiddle around with vue which makes things so much easier and fun to work with(not perfect but a lot more fun)

CaptainMarlowe
12-23-2015, 11:32 AM
You can also synchronise TG camera as a .chan file from Lightwave with a free script, and export non infinite terrains from TG directly to Lightwave objects. With shadow catcher it can ease compositing process. It's called lw2tgs.ls, if I recall correctly. With this .chan exporter, you can just have TG créative+animation. I'm strongly considering this option.

dickbill
12-23-2015, 12:11 PM
With this .chan exporter, you can just have TG créative+animation.
Although Tg Creative + animation is missing these important features compare to Pro+animation:
from :
http://planetside.co.uk/products/tg3-product-comparison

Missing features / My comments

Render layers and elements / Vue can render separate elements
Spherical camera / probably not used very often
FBX import/export (cameras, lights, nulls) / I use Fiber FX on almost all my zbrush models
Camera data import/export / how do you match perspective ?
Rotation order on camera import / ?
Terrain geometry export / eh, can't export terrain ?
EXR output (renders, heightfields) / ?

CaptainMarlowe
12-23-2015, 01:04 PM
You can export lwo terrains even with the free edition. I create all my terrains in TG3 then export them to .lwo. The free lscrt I'm referont to exports Lights and camera (rotation, animation, FOV) from Lightwave but not the other way though. It's not as complete as TG pro+animation but it is much cheaper. I am not home, but I'll do a video of this workflow when I can.

m.d.
12-23-2015, 01:16 PM
Spherical camera / probably not used very often
FBX import/export (cameras, lights, nulls) / I use Fiber FX on almost all my zbrush models


Spherical camera I could have used on my very first project....important for bringing in a TG atmosphere into LW to get correct reflections....i rendered out 12 images and stitched them together in post.

FBX and FiberFX? dont quite understand the connection there...

m.d.
12-23-2015, 01:20 PM
You can export lwo terrains even with the free edition. I create all my terrains in TG3 then export them to .lwo. The free lscrt I'm referont to exports Lights and camera (rotation, animation, FOV) from Lightwave but not the other way though. It's not as complete as TG pro+animation but it is much cheaper. I am not home, but I'll do a video of this workflow when I can.

never knew that.....thanks

but TG has pretty limited animation controls, it is much more valuable the other way around.....for example I am doing a planetary scene, and want the camera to rotate or orbit the planet.....well you cant parent the camera to the planet(or anything for that matter) so to animate the camera in a perfect circle requires some math. Would be so easy to animate in LW and export to TG

that being said, that script would be very handy

m.d.
12-23-2015, 01:30 PM
TG is painstaking to use at present...without their forums I would be lost.

Usually when you ask a noob question, someone here would tell you RTFM :)

But for TG the manual is so incomplete....there are huge undocumented functions that completely have no explanation (a GI parameter called "bounce to the ounce" for example....zero documentation)
I was trying to invert a mask....well one would think the "color invert node" would do the job....nope...."color compliment" is the node you need. Again, no documentation on either.

And there are some major features missing.....say you create a height map, cool....place it anywhere in the scene you wish....but dont rotate it. If you want to rotate it....do it in photoshop....because you can't in TG.

VUE is far easier to use....I've used both fairly extensively. TG can beat it....but you need a pretty deep knowledge of the program to do it.

CaptainMarlowe
12-23-2015, 01:40 PM
You can animate in LW and export to TG, it's from TG to LW which is impossible with the lscript. I won't be home before a week, to show case this. but for animating in TG you'll need créative+animation, ofc. To be honest, I have only tried with the first frame on the free edition.
I have given up on Eon products long ago. Ozone never worked correctly on my Mac, and the Vue Line price tag is to heavy for keeping up to date. When Vue 5 infinite stopped working on OS X, I just bought Vue 9 esprit to concert my models for cornucopia3d as one of their brokered artists.
For me, if New render engine in LW allows for decent atmosphere and clouds, I'll use TG free version just for creating terrains, if not I may consider creative +animation

m.d.
12-23-2015, 01:55 PM
The real bonus with TG is customer service....

A week or so ago, I requested 16bit tiff animation output in TG3 creative + anim, and Matt the developer told me January.
Thats pretty good when they will answer you on the forums AND give you a timeline when you will get it....EON you will barely get an answer

Funny how some developers can build a new render engine, and communicate on the forums at the same time:D

prometheus
12-23-2015, 02:15 PM
The real bonus with TG is customer service....

A week or so ago, I requested 16bit tiff animation output in TG3 creative + anim, and Matt the developer told me January.
Thats pretty good when they will answer you on the forums AND give you a timeline when you will get it....EON you will barely get an answer

Funny how some developers can build a new render engine, and communicate on the forums at the same time:D

Ivé only been a PLE customer for using their learning edition...even so I have been getting replies on stuff regarding ozone and vue...so that I do not recognize, could be a question of the question itself..or your questions landed in the wrong department?

prometheus
12-23-2015, 02:21 PM
ng ago. Ozone never worked correctly on my Mac, and the Vue Line price tag is to heavy for keeping up to date. When Vue 5 infinite stopped working on OS X, I just bought Vue 9 esprit to concert my models for cornucopia3d as one of their brokered artists.
For me, if New render engine in LW allows for decent atmosphere and clouds, I'll use TG free version just for creating terrains, if not I may consider creative +animation

I would suspect the new Lightwave volumetrics will be fast and render realisticly ..and some new container modes to shape clouds better, and what I saw lino showcase..means you can add several nulls or volume containers to shape clouds..like metaclouds in vue, and it will be very fast...previously you couldnīt do that with several nulls and hypervoxels without getting the VPR freezing and the render taking enourmously long time..so that will be nice, but itīs only half of what is needed, second to that it needs the volumetric light to also be fast together with the volumetrics(quite horrendous in lw today with volumetric light and hypervoxels)...and it needs a sort of realistic global scale adaption to get attenuation falloff and size of the volumetrics to work the whole global world realisticly...that volumetric sunlight also needs a sampled light with soft shadows...with all that in place you could probably mix with sunsky to get a simulated look of true spectral/volumetric environment...though it isnīt truly representing light decay, attenuation through fog,mist, particles in the air as the vue spectral atmosphere does...would be great if we could have that too.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6PDjQdPyus

m.d.
12-23-2015, 03:08 PM
Ivé only been a PLE customer for using their learning edition...even so I have been getting replies on stuff regarding ozone and vue...so that I do not recognize, could be a question of the question itself..or your questions landed in the wrong department?

sorry yes answers you will get....

feature requests promised within a month is another story.

dickbill
12-24-2015, 07:36 AM
Regarding LW future volumetric achievements, even if it promises to be impressive, I don't believe in the philosophy of a software that does it all, (think about a multirole jet fighter F35ish). LW will not replace a software dedicated to modeling, or to large scale landscaping. Obviously that means that I appreciate when LW can interface with other softwares like Goz and VueSynch in the past.

But, comparing Vue and Terragen again, I visited their respective galleries and, regardless of everything else, Tg produces images with a photorealism that is nothing less of stunning. Vue Gallery is great, no doubt, and the interface is easy and it may have functionalities missing in Tg, etc. But Tg's photorealism has no match, in my opinion.

kadri
12-24-2015, 08:02 AM
I used that lscript in the past but lately exporting and importing FBX files was enough.From Terragen to Lightwave and vice versa.
http://planetside.co.uk/wiki/index.php?title=FBX_Compatibility

kadri
12-24-2015, 08:10 AM
...
And there are some major features missing.....say you create a height map, cool....place it anywhere in the scene you wish....but dont rotate it. If you want to rotate it....do it in photoshop....because you can't in TG.
...

You can do it with a "Transform input node"But yeah a more basic direct way would be nice.

dickbill
12-24-2015, 09:20 AM
I thought FBX was for Fiber FX. Obviously not, although nowhere in the link this acronym is explained.

m.d.
12-24-2015, 11:49 AM
You can do it with a "Transform input node"But yeah a more basic direct way would be nice.

no you can't rotate it....I did try that first thing....unless of course I am doing something wrong. After much frustration I checked the forums and found only this.

http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,17682.msg171374.html#msg171374

You can move it in all 3 axis....just not rotate

m.d.
12-24-2015, 11:54 AM
I thought FBX was for Fiber FX. Obviously not, although nowhere in the link this acronym is explained.

It was motionbuilders interchange format. Probably the most widely used interchange format between 3d application. Can handle geometry, animation, basic shaders and UV, camera, lights etc.

The only interchange format bigger in scope is Alembic....which can handle fluids...changing polycount etc

Greenlaw
12-24-2015, 12:35 PM
I thought FBX was for Fiber FX. Obviously not, although nowhere in the link this acronym is explained.

FBX stands for Filmbox, the precursor to Motion Builder. It's a super old animation file format created by a company called Kaydara. Nowadays, it's being developed by Autodesk, and the format is used by almost every serious 3D animation and compositing program out there for sharing animation data, including LightWave.

You can use FBX for transferring motion data for bones, geometry, camera, lights, etc. It has very little to do with FiberFX unless you're using FBX to transfer geometry for hair guides but OBJ is probably a better format for that. For FiberFX motion from other programs, it's better to use MDD, Geocache or Alembec to move displacement data for fiber guides.

FBX also supports UV maps, weight maps and textures, although you may get mixed results for material settings because every program handles this data differently.

I'm not sure FBX supports displacement. I don't think it can but I've never tried it for that. MDD and Geometry Cache is the standard method for transferring displacement data, although Alembec is catching on. (I've worked with guys who use Alembec for moving huge water simulations from various programs to LightWave or for getting LightWave animations into those programs.)

I use FBX mainly to send camera data from LightWave to Maya and vice versa, or to transfer animation data from rigs in Motion Builder and other programs to rigged characters in Layout.

FBX also works great for getting the camera and objects from LightWave to Fusion. I use it to set up 3D compositing and 3D particle effects in Fusion all the time.

Vue Infinite and Vue XStream support LightWave directly.

Infinite (which is what I use) can import .lwo and LightWave cameras, which can help make composting Vue renders with LightWave a breeze.

XStream adds a LightWave plugin that allows you to open Vue scene inside of LightWave and render it there. We used to use Xtream in the Box because LightWave's AA used to be better than Vue's, but Vue's AA saw a lot of improvement in version 9 or 10, so we switched to rendering in Vue with its Render Cows. Vue also renders much faster in its native renderer. Naturally, users who don't use compositing programs may find it more convenient to render directly in LightWave with Vue XStream.

G.

kadri
12-24-2015, 12:53 PM
no you can't rotate it....I did try that first thing....unless of course I am doing something wrong. After much frustration I checked the forums and found only this.

http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,17682.msg171374.html#msg171374

You can move it in all 3 axis....just not rotate

When i saw "height map" i read it as an image map. There are different ways of course. Not sure what you tried.
It might depend on what you do. Because in the link you posted it is about a TER file.
It looks like rotating a TER file is problematic. Heightfields are one of the things i haven't tried much in Terragen.
But if you use an image file for a heightfiled you could do it as in the image below a (45 degree rotated image map example).
Still a little cumbersome but doable.

131595

dickbill
12-24-2015, 02:03 PM
Infinite (which is what I use) can import .lwo and LightWave cameras, which can help make composting Vue renders with LightWave a breeze.

XStream adds a LightWave plugin that allows you to open Vue scene inside of LightWave and render it there. We used to use Xtream in the Box because LightWave's AA used to be better than Vue's, but Vue's AA saw a lot of improvement in version 9 or 10, so we switched to rendering in Vue with its Render Cows. Vue also renders much faster in its native renderer. Naturally, users who don't use compositing programs may find it more convenient to render directly in LightWave with Vue XStream.

G.

Thanks for the explanation. I finally figured how to use a Vue Infinite exported scene in Lightwave, even without the VueSynch plugin. It's the traditional Z <--> Y axis switch, plus a camera focal ratio Vue/LW of approximately 1.36 (in a scene set for 1920/1080).
Do you know where this 1.36 ratio is coming from?

m.d.
12-24-2015, 05:34 PM
When i saw "height map" i read it as an image map. There are different ways of course. Not sure what you tried.
It might depend on what you do. Because in the link you posted it is about a TER file.
It looks like rotating a TER file is problematic. Heightfields are one of the things i haven't tried much in Terragen.
But if you use an image file for a heightfiled you could do it as in the image below a (45 degree rotated image map example).
Still a little cumbersome but doable.

131595

Yes you are right of course....
In most 3d apps heightmaps refers to just greyscale values
by heightmap I was meaning DEM's and TER files....

The beauty of a "heightmap" in TG as opposed to an image map (displacement image) is the height map has XZ size and maximum, minimum elevations embedded in the file....so no need for experimenting with displacement values, or trying to figure out how large the terrain is in XZ....

For instance if you wanted to create some hero geometry (mountain ect) based on real world terrrain, or something you wanted to save as a preset the TER format would be the way to go.....for instance you could have an array of TER preset landscapes that all have the correct elevation's to work with procedural shaders etc....not to mention rotating DEM's to fit a scene.
But since you can't rotate it it is kind of useless, unless you are happy with it's default orientation.

I guess you could convert it to a displacement image and manually enter the XY values....but the maximum and minimum elevations may be problematic to get without some experimentation. It's very handy to have scale embedded.

kadri
12-24-2015, 06:48 PM
You know depending on the scene you want to do some guys who use it more in that aspect might help you in the Terragen forum.
There are other not so elegant-despaired ways too but i would use the method you wrote most certainly.
A 16-32 bit TIF or EXR displacement image or another 3D program to rotate the heightfield.
The ability for rotating would be certainly nice. A feature request wouldn't hurt m.d. Especially before the new version.

prometheus
12-26-2015, 11:32 AM
Regarding LW future volumetric achievements, even if it promises to be impressive, I don't believe in the philosophy of a software that does it all, (think about a multirole jet fighter F35ish). LW will not replace a software dedicated to modeling, or to large scale landscaping. Obviously that means that I appreciate when LW can interface with other softwares like Goz and VueSynch in the past.

But, comparing Vue and Terragen again, I visited their respective galleries and, regardless of everything else, Tg produces images with a photorealism that is nothing less of stunning. Vue Gallery is great, no doubt, and the interface is easy and it may have functionalities missing in Tg, etc. But Tg's photorealism has no match, in my opinion.

Im of a different opinion than you regarding a software that does it all...wonīt go in to deeper in detail around that now though.
Regarding terragen gallery vs vue...the thing though, terragen picks the very best artist mostly..while vue has a vast collection of user artists not doing so good job with the environment, if they would have picked the best..the contrast wouldnīt be so strong between realism and quality in my opinion.

A tip..just installed blender to check what can be done there..the sculpting tools are decent for some editing or base mesh terrain sculpting..it now got dynatopo sculpting so you can drag the hook brush to get some fun stuff going.
anyway..blender also got the ANT landscape tool..just activate the addon in the preferences addon panel..it will create a setup with a terrain already applied with fractals and zero edges..

I used it to create a base mesh ..but only so far in detail to create the general landscape..the rest is lightwave...
Oh..donīt critic me now..:) this is of course not unpar with terragen, just fiddled and tested the terrain from blender, I could enhance it way more and better if I wanted too...
This i a bit of a crosspost too...wish lightwave could get some more terrain fractals, along with new volumetrics it will look a lot better..also if we get better poly handling and perhaps microdisplacement further down the road.

I have just taken some hours to try and overcome blender UI, there is a free addon you just have to activate in the preference panel in blender, ANT, a tool to create terrain, it sets it up with a grid you can set divisions and different fractals on..itīs already applied so you got an instant terrain, I found some interesting fractals there..the typical multiridge with a voronoi F2 noise..gives a nice mountain ridge for starters..and it keeps the terrain with zero edges.

I used that to create the base mesh..wich is freezed so to speak, only giving it detail enough for the larger area..then in lightwave using the rock procedural and with some falloff on y-axis so the rock displacement only takes effect on higher peaks..the same rock displacement is then copied to bump but added more frequens on it to make smaller rock detail.
hypervoxels in cel lighting mode..if done right it can give some interesting clouds actually...hvīs are on a large particle emitter....lightning just added in after effects, the render is a bit grainy since I used vpr and not refined it properly though...so not a final render.
I also instanced the terrains two times I think.

no radiosity, only one sk_sunlight, one sk_skylight to give environment lighting...to low settings and with vpr that is giving to much noise in this image though....I had made a better texture on the terrain a couple of times, but unfortunatly I worked on the obj file of the terrain...Do not do that, save it the first thing you do after it is created in blender..open it in lightwave and save to lwo.

http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=131608&d=1451152929

m.d.
12-26-2015, 03:50 PM
If you want some good terrains generation for free...check this out
http://www.lilchips.com/hmes.htm

Terrain generator with erosion capabilities as well, similar to world machine....but free

hdace
12-26-2015, 04:21 PM
We just finished our trailer film. It has a lot of Terragen/LightWave integration. There is a planet scene as well as all the Terragen sky/mountain backgrounds. The penultimate shot is the best. The only thing I never could figure out was how to get the gamma in the Terragen shadows to match the Octane shadows. The shadowy trees in Terragen always look darker than the shadowy trees produced by Octane. Well, I'll figure it out someday...

https://youtu.be/MJpyfhkfm3Q

btw, a far better solution to over clocking is to simply buy 8 physical core cpus instead of 4. One of my i7's is becoming unreliable after having been over clocked for several years. Now I much prefer to simply buy more cores per cpu.

Anyway, I would love it if Terragen had GPU rendering but with only a couple of guys writing the code I don't see that happening very soon, if at all.

prometheus
12-26-2015, 04:58 PM
If you want some good terrains generation for free...check this out
http://www.lilchips.com/hmes.htm

Terrain generator with erosion capabilities as well, similar to world machine....but free

interesting ..will take a look...but once they release a retail ..commercial version, you are not allowed to use it and must delete it...
"6. You will delete and cease from using any and all alpha and beta copies once the retail version is released."

could not install the terresculptor...microsoft framework errors..probably dot net package missing.

kadri
01-01-2016, 06:54 PM
A turntable video to test how Terragen 4's new light scattering model for clouds responds to different camera and lighting angles posted by Matt:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87TkK1_avO0&feature=youtu.be
More details are here:
http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=20955.new#new

The cloud lighting looks really different and great.

prometheus
01-01-2016, 07:07 PM
That was awasome..a very nice realistic cloud formation indeed, nothing to complain about at all really...But, would suspect Long ..long rendertimes, so ..no wonder they took the opportunity to advert for the pixel plow renderfarm.
Still want to see how it behaves in the previewer with clouds.
Maybe they are about to post that soon, that clip was only posted one hour ago I think.

sadkkf
01-04-2016, 01:18 PM
the vue external plugin Helios added subvapor scattering for clouds, unfortunatly he posted this on his blogs, not in the helios feature pages...
http://www.daxpandhi.com/post/Understanding-Helios-1

from what I can see..it is easier to acheive cloud softness at the edges of the cloud volume, it scatters light very nicely...and a completly new set of fractal functions for cloudlets...
what I didnīt like about how helios works..except for being expensive...In his presentation he is doing the cloud preview updates with a manual button apply, that I do not like, if you do changes I would like to have an option to either manually do it as shown..Or have it autoupdate the previewer once I have changed a setting.

http://www.quadspinner.com/Helios/Index

To bad one can not test it I think...would be nice if one could test it with one of the vue ple versions...with a small watermark and perhaps a render resolution limit, but otherwise almost fully working for anyone able to test it properly anyway...without giving it away in a manner that allows for commercial work.



Keep in mind, too, Helios is only compatible with xStream and Infinite, the expensive versions of Vue. :)

prometheus
01-04-2016, 05:46 PM
Keep in mind, too, Helios is only compatible with xStream and Infinite, the expensive versions of Vue. :)

if I were to aim for any vue of the versions.,.those two would be it, so that wouldnīt be an issue, what is an issue is how it worked inside of vue with manual updates of tweaking for each little tweak you do..that I didnīt like.
Might need to write to Dax and, ask about improvents on that and what is the current status etc..but all that has to wait until lightwave 2016 comes with itīs new volumetrics and what terragen 4 has to offer in tweaking interactivity.

prometheus
01-30-2016, 10:14 AM
Some more of the new stuff in terragen 4, though I still lack any feedback from showcasing the previewer with clouds, donīt understand why they are not showcasing that, we do get finished rendered sequences ..which often is produced with the help of renderfarms of pixelplow, which is also showcased as a special ad for them, that is however not what I want to see..I still need to see how fast the previewer will be with volumetric cloud tweaking.

Here is a new vid..showcasing planetary render and a new ozone layer to improve on realism...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z__WZOh1wXU



Michael

prometheus
01-30-2016, 10:17 AM
This one is showcasing the new enhancement of lensflare effects...results are stunning...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHGO0nni-e0

prometheus
01-30-2016, 10:29 AM
hereīs another one, but ..these kind of stuff is probably the most computer intense rendering operations in the cg field....creating worlds and environments with all itīs full atmospheric glory, as can be seen from the description on the youtube clip, the actual creator of the scene got help from the planet side team to do a high quality render of it all...that may say something about very long rendertimes not suitable for all unless access to renderfarms.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8dxNeVXgc8

erikals
01-30-2016, 10:33 AM
i'm a bit... > meh...

can't that lensflare be done in LightWave

the Fantasy render looks so-so imo,
ok clouds though...

prometheus
01-30-2016, 11:46 AM
i'm a bit... > meh...

can't that lensflare be done in LightWave

the Fantasy render looks so-so imo,
ok clouds though...

not quite sure of that, there seem to be some difficulties with lightwave lensflare progressivity, so when passing behind object it is tricky to get right and natural..canīt say for sure though, there are differences between vpr and final renders..so I would need to set up special test scenes for it with trees.
I know vue handle that lens sunflare pretty nicely when being obscured by treeīs or objects.


the fantasy render..wellk, so so as you also think, the lens flare I am more impressed with, as the planet render showcasing ozone layer..considering that is a full planet volumetric render at global scale, and no surfacing tricks on geometry..but I reckon it comes with the trade off at extreme long render time, but in terms of realism..not much beats it.


But itīs not just the lenflares here that makes it nice..itīs also volumetric rays, same here..not easy to get it nice in lightwave either I think, not in regards with keeping background environment also visible at the same time.

erikals
01-30-2016, 01:31 PM
hm, tested a bit, found the volumetrics indeed to be tricky...

just can't see the solution right now...
attached the scene file if someone wants to give it a go...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSpNQBjJLoQ

The Wizzard
01-30-2016, 02:06 PM
hm, tested a bit, found the volumetrics indeed to be tricky...

just can't see the solution right now...
attached the scene file if someone wants to give it a go...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSpNQBjJLoQ

Here's the best I could come up with:

132121

erikals
01-30-2016, 02:06 PM
seems OGO Taiki can do it?
http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~pq1a-ogs/taiki1.mpg

erikals
01-30-2016, 02:09 PM
The Wizzard   Here's the best I could come up with:

132121

hey, that's on to something, may i ask what settings you used here... ?

that's 800% better than what i could smack together...

prometheus
01-30-2016, 02:13 PM
seems OGO Taiki can do it?
http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~pq1a-ogs/taiki1.mpg

it might, havenīt tested it with plants...havenīt got the full version.

though the concept of it is how it should be, the sunlight isnīt by itself volumetric, it uses a global fog, mist layer to produce godrays/sunbeams...unfortunatly, only 32 bit which makes it not so usuful with denser landscape terrain etc, and no longer developed, and very slow etc etc..

all the new volumetric voxels in 2016 in all glory, but they should have tried to implement something like ogoīs full volumetric engine...it makes me a bit sad that this tech and plugin has been around for a long time, and nothing else have happened since then.

erikals
01-30-2016, 02:22 PM
yes, looked at his webpage and felt very sorry that he had such an awesome product at the time that never got the attention it deserved

well, moving on, Octane to the rescue... sort of...


https://vimeo.com/65119000

https://www.fxguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/rays.jpg

prometheus
01-30-2016, 03:27 PM
yes, looked at his webpage and felt very sorry that he had such an awesome product at the time that never got the attention it deserved

well, moving on, Octane to the rescue... sort of...


https://vimeo.com/65119000

https://www.fxguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/rays.jpg

Ah..that is nice..didnīt know it had such volumetric engine, seem to be a seperate volumetric layer of fog? must look in to that..
it will however only render cloudless skies? not sure...thought I saw something about open vdb or something?

The Wizzard
01-30-2016, 03:49 PM
hey, that's on to something, may i ask what settings you used here... ?

that's 800% better than what i could smack together...

Thanks, I had a further play - Here's a better version


https://youtu.be/6mnsGyFWpSU

The Wizzard
01-30-2016, 04:17 PM
Here's the scene I used the re-make yours.

132127

I took out Corona - I found I didn't need it.

* Changed the "Sun" to a distance light and Targeted it to the Camera
132124

I used an envelope and Graph editor to make the length the distance to Camera
132122

Other settings:
132125 132126

erikals
01-31-2016, 12:55 AM
seem to be a separate volumetric layer of fog?
it will however only render cloudless skies?

not sure, maybe ask this guy, he used LightWave + Octane
(edit; looking again, i think he added the fog in post)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hx9jg7FnArQ

yep, vdb is now supported
Octane 3 now supports LightWave TurbulenceFD
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?149140-Octane-TurbulenceFD-True&p=1462626&viewfull=1#post1462626

http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=131904&d=1452878481&thumb=1

there is this cloud slice trick though (works the same way in LightWave)
https://render.otoy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=44337
but note that those are not volumetrics, rather "blurred sliced poly planes"


if the new LightWave 2016 HyperVoxels supported vdb, it'd make a good addition to Octane
haven't heard it will though... or...

lino.grandi
well... since OpenVDB is deeply related to volumetrics, and since we already talked about this new feature present in the next release...
expect a post on the Blog talking about OpenVDB.

erikals
01-31-2016, 02:46 AM
Awesome David!  http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/king.gif

i'm giving it some test runs right now...

The Wizzard
01-31-2016, 03:03 AM
Awesome David!  http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/king.gif

i'm giving it some test runs right now...

You're welcome mate, Glad it helped :thumbsup:

prometheus
01-31-2016, 06:51 AM
I will check the volumetric scene soon from Dave, looks decent, though the ambient lighting or what it is is sort of flattening out the trees too much, thanks for the scene...will study later this evening and see whatīs going on.

regarding cloud procedural tricks, personally I do not like the look of it, too much slicing a lack volumetric depth, so I would stick to hypervoxels..or better yet, the new volumetrics when it arrives.
We really donīt need much to enhance environments..we need infinite procedural volumetric layers for cloud procedurals, along with a spectral fog layer ..and a sun that will work with all those yielding sunrays and soft shadows, then again..all that might be hard to develop?
But after all this time one would think someone should have studied the case of ogo taiki and other recent developments..I mean, its been how many years since ogo taiki surfaced?

hereīs a mixup I did some days ago, rechecking volumetrics in lightwave 2015, the good thing is that VPR in 2015 is quite fast so setting it up and tweak it is much better than 11.6.3 but I donīt think the actual final render can cope with it at a decent time scope, Ivé also experience a lot of crashes with 2015 ..so not sure to continue rendering with it as it works today, need to check the 64 bit version first.

100% voxels and sk_sunlight with a volumetric point light following the position of sk_sun with sk_sun motion modifier, the volumetric light is excluded from the ground so I do not get hard shadows from the volumetric point light, that is taken care of by sk_sun, the only thing the volumetric light should do is cast volumetric rays.

though we shouldnīt have to go this route of using two lights, and exlcuding object, and add motion modifier to compensate for a true volumetric sunlight with sampled soft shadows.


https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-oofdKxkYudM/VqX6pMmxoCI/AAAAAAAACkQ/CpxQZ_LBEyc/s1440-Ic42/volumetrics0000_028.jpg

The Wizzard
01-31-2016, 10:03 AM
Thanks, prometheus... it wasn't meant to be a complete scene, just a starting Point.
I just throw it together once I got the volume light doing something "God ray" like.
It could do with some blurring on them too... for that, I think a multi-layered output and some After-Effects is required LOL

prometheus
01-31-2016, 11:21 AM
Thanks, prometheus... it wasn't meant to be a complete scene, just a starting Point.
I just throw it together once I got the volume light doing something "God ray" like.
It could do with some blurring on them too... for that, I think a multi-layered output and some After-Effects is required LOL

donīt think one is talking about volumetric lights/sunbeams through forest and trees as godrays, that is probably dedicated the crepuscular rays from clouds :) but you did put it within the quotation mark :)
not sure if there is another term for that..or maybe I am wrong?


Taking a fast look at the scene..ahh..that is good, using the distant light, normally I would use a point light..but that imposes issues with hard to control density vs background visibility, with a distant light like this, you are focusing the beam..
though if you were to set this to show ground area, you would encounter the problem with no soft shadows, so you may have to use two lights here, and exclude this volumetric distant light from the ground.
another issue would be if you have bird or a dragon..god forbid, flying in the skies, if you havent set the radius properly it will not affect those objects...same goes if you rotate the camera 360 degrees, wouldnīt hold up either...but I guess for the time being..one has to resort to what is possible in terms of limited volumetric lights.

I so would like to have a proper fog/mist layer taking care of oll the volumetrics, then you would simply just use sk sunlight and you would have soft shadows (0,52 angle) and no other lights needed.
Bryan Philips, has a tutorial on youtube (bryphi77) on how to do some tricks to overcome the absence of sampled lights.

noticed you have a high ambience on the trees, reduce that employ radiosity and the trees would look better, but I understand you probably didnīt care about that for a simple showcase of the volumetrics.

the small radius of the distant light is sort of a hack, one should be able to have a very large radius and get the volumetrics working, but itīs there it gets tricky to balance the density, luminosity, and also opacity to get it looking nice with background.

prometheus
01-31-2016, 11:37 AM
To note...if you adjust the radius of the volumetric light, the light radius will be to large for it to look realistic and it becomes overblown, you can try and check fade in fog, and set a proper realistic fog and set the proper maximal distance, the lower the distance is..the smaller the light glow will be from the volumetrics.

I will try and enhance the scene a bit, and post later, throwing in ground ..changing camera angles etc.

http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=132144&d=1454265402

erikals
01-31-2016, 01:23 PM
added a few tweaks, but turned out so-so

-Virtual DarkRoom
-Contrast
-Noise Reduction (post)
-Vignette (post)
-Glow (HitFilm)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9k7_oa4Kswk


but overall, it's good to see that it can be done, and with the right settings, hopefully photoreal

prometheus
01-31-2016, 05:23 PM
firstly one should replace the sky with sunsky, and select the light as sunlight, add the sk_suncolor modifier as envelope in the volumetric lights color channel, so when the sun goes down, the color changes accordingly.
one could also turn of (exlude the ground object from this ligh, we do not want supersharp shadows) add a dome light with 0,52 angle..and use that as the main raycaster of shadows that are a bit softer, parent the light to follow the main volumetric light.

contrast can be taken care of within sunsky, not sure if glow is necessary, vignette is always nice, and noise reduction perhaps.

Michael

erikals
02-01-2016, 12:04 AM
yes, the more i look into it, the more i want to go the Octane route for this stuff

LW2016 will have vdb, so hopefully the new HyperVoxels can be kicked into Octane

--------

self reminder for later on...
- add translucency to the leaves

erikals
02-01-2016, 03:59 AM
might need to give Gerardo a call...

http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?71751-Extra-Buffer-nodes&p=1215310&viewfull=1#post1215310

132153

madno
02-06-2016, 11:57 AM
Played with your scene. I changed cs to sRGB and then played with any setting I found.
Not a masterpice but was fun.
Image sequence rendered in low quality to save time.

132239


https://vimeo.com/154427608

(my first uploaded video; so don't know why the quality is so bad)

erikals
02-06-2016, 12:06 PM
http://forums.newtek.com/images/misc/quote_icon.pngmadno

Played with your scene. I changed cs to sRGB and then played with any setting I found.
Not a masterpiece but was fun.
Image sequence rendered in low quality to save time.


https://vimeo.com/154427608
 



Looks Great! http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/smile.gif

note, original scene by David "3ATIVE"


wonder, any particular settings you found had a big impact, other than sRGB ?

madno
02-06-2016, 12:45 PM
BackLite node from DP gave the leaves a little translucency look.
GI active with gradient sky helped (and allowed me to disable ambience in the sun light).
Main light strength was lowered substantially and at the same time volume light intensity increased.
I gave the volume a little late day color ("Specify Medium Color" in volume settings).
Lowered the RedShift in volume light (was to red in my render).
And then playing with the volume settings (I noticed that changing them, only made sense to me after I switched to sRGB).
Density is the main one to control the strength of the light streaks. But they are also dependent on attenuation.
When the radius of the volume light was high I did not get a sun circle, but a big white blow instead. So I used a high attenuation value to concentrate the light. I got more of a sun circle then but the streaks became less and less visible. In the end it was a lot of playing around.

Corona and Bloom did not work very well. So I added that part in post (Fusion - much more control and fun to see the changes in real time).

Skipped the part of spec. or reflection on the leafs. Maybe with another try.

(changed ericals to David "3ATIVE" in the vimeo description)

erikals
02-06-2016, 03:01 PM
i can see you really pushed LightWave on this one   http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/smile.gif

thank you for info, will have a closer look soon!

BackLite is indeed an cool DPont node, need to dig more into that node (!) http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/047.gif

prometheus
02-06-2016, 04:15 PM
I donīt think it is wise to use srgb when working with environment and outdoor scenes, all for it for interiors etc..but not outdoors, it will only yield washed out effects and also sort of destroying the dark shadows overall that can occour outdoors..as well as the proper color tone for sk_sun I think.

the effect of red light also depends on attenuation..

madno
02-07-2016, 02:59 AM
Not sure about general use of sRGB. Just found out that volume lights worked more predictable for me that way.

Anyway:
Was playing around a little more. Put an HDR panorama into textured environment and then fiddled with Fusion's color corrector etc.

132249

Got the HDR from here:
thread from HDRI heaven on cgsociety.org (http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=59&t=1338585)

erikals
02-07-2016, 03:10 AM
Very Nice, it's interesting that this has no Tone Mapping, wonder how it would look

but as far as i recall Tone Mapping works best with linear ?

in this case though, i feel Tone Mapping isn't needed ?

it's much closer to Gerardo's result now, i like both, thank you again for sharing madno

132153
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?71751-Extra-Buffer-nodes&p=1215310&viewfull=1#post1215310

prometheus
02-07-2016, 08:25 PM
I donīt know about you guys, donīt think you guys are motion mapping two lights together as I often do, that is..the sk_sunlight and the volumetric light..and use motion sk_sun motion modifier for the volumetric light, the reason for that is to achieve soft shadows ..where I exclude the ground from the volumetric light...and the sk_sun is the only light that takes care of the shadows casted...and it is a bit softer with 0.52 degree angle.

Now ..there is something that frustrates me with that..if I also want the lensflare active on the volumetric light, it will follow along just as the volumetric light follows the sk_sunlight...but I can not see it in VPR, not until I switch back to the volumetric light..and in some cases in 11.6.2 ..i also have to turn the vpr on and off for it to update.

I would simply like to rotate the sk_ sun manually and have the lensflare update in realtime with that ..so I can dial in the sun and flare position nicely and see it go behind objects interactivly...but I can not do that, thinking about giving up on all these volumetric light stuff in lightwave sometimes and ..should I really invest in the landscape software instead..with full proper realistic control over that...Oh well..may have to request it before they put out lightwave 2016.

You guys will not have this issue ..since you are just using one light and rotating the distant volumetric light only, and it doesnīt need to take in account the sk_sun motion modifier, so the lensflare simply updates and follows as it should...if you guys were to use it to be seen casting shadows on the ground..then you would get all hard shadows, which isnīt desirable.


bryphi77 has the trick of using a volumetric null container and dp boolean shader etc ..to allow for soft shadows from distant lights for instance..but it seems way to slow in my opinion, so I am not going that route.

kadri
02-12-2016, 11:57 AM
New video.
Ray-traced Realtime Preview – Part 2

http://terragen4.com/ray-traced-realtime-preview-part-2/

Curious about the machine specs.

Nice to see that they have incorporated crop rendering in the preview window.

kadri
02-12-2016, 12:08 PM
Osyhan just replied about the pecs:

"It's a dual Xeon 8 core/16 threads per CPU, so 16 cores total, 32 total threads. In the demo it has been limited to 28 threads to maintain overall system responsiveness (Terragen can be a hungry beast :D). So of course on this awesome machine it runs great, but it will still run really well even on lesser single CPU systems, standard i7's, etc. I posted a comparative example of other aspects of the ray-traced preview running on my i7 back when the original video was posted. Here's that video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBx1YuTORk0

- Oshyan "

prometheus
02-12-2016, 12:18 PM
finally..this is what I wanted to see, and ..definitly seems as an acceptable preview render speed now...much better, hands crossed a bit since I do not know how fast my system would handle it nvidie gtx 480
i7 960 3,20 GHz 64 threads 12 GB ram.

will have to check the demo as soon as they release one.

kadri
02-12-2016, 12:22 PM
The machine is a very fast one for sure, but even the crop rendering would be very useful....kind of a compromise for slower ones like my i7 2600k 3.4 GHZ.

prometheus
02-12-2016, 12:52 PM
I guess lightwave VPR and the new volumetrics will still be faster and also at full screen mind you, though it is understandably so... that lightwave will probably not have equally stuff in there with the true volumetrics atmosphere and all the complex algorithms for describing such atmosphere with all that realism. (would be happily surprised if they pulled that off though)

At least both lightwave and terragen will get their volumetrics faster, so the pain of working with volumetrics will be easire to deal with...and honestly, maybe one or two years from now, I might need to invest in new hardware too even better suited for the task.

Michael

kadri
02-12-2016, 01:02 PM
I guess lightwave VPR and the new volumetrics will still be faster and also at full screen mind you, though it is understandably so... that lightwave will probably not have equally stuff in there with the true volumetrics atmosphere and all the complex algorithms for describing such atmosphere with all that realism. (would be happily surprised if they pulled that off though)

At least both lightwave and terragen will get their volumetrics faster, so the pain of working with volumetrics will be easire to deal with...and honestly, maybe one or two years from now, I might need to invest in new hardware too even better suited for the task.

Michael

Looks reasonable.

Yeah the newer ending faster PC search for 3D guys is kind of tiring. Just when you see the light at the end then there comes 4K, stereoscoping rendering etc.
But it doesn't bother me much as it was 10-15 years ago at least.

Curious what other things we get along Lightwave 2016 and Terragen 4. Sometimes the relative small new things that are not so much previewed are much helpful additions...

erikals
02-25-2016, 10:28 AM
a bit related... >


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=379NMF2cEUo

erikals
02-25-2016, 10:49 AM
just some examples... >


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AV9tx0TaSVY


a few more...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RMXyUOb6Go
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9C4FEBHGTo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4k0gIH6WgM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBzp2FpVZlc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQABi8DPk2k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JPDiWtUCws
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwuAOjK_jjY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnkPZVyRInQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pagvP3AoVU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gt5dC7cgKpw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMl2_fa1pQk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mXPlSCu1E8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oaoZAqlN90

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkkvjgbT9KA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8HNd8F8z0A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHrmC540xJc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRfLXWtD7lA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bu367j-G4HM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDnplbRsY8Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2pu_xhBnzY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJe_SVgFBh0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2j6WdegMFxQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHopQJlzRA8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AWdTm7zfFQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlIoD3OfHCg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmN4jZCB87c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvZvq6bqlr0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inAMy_2fDmU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYe0FFq13Rk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkVY3b-q3XA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRU_kALKrGM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4fO9WuewJE

...something like that

Photogram
02-25-2016, 01:08 PM
One thing i hope about sun simulation is when to sun is going under the horizon after sunset, the sky colors that i get with DP are far from realistic especially at the begining of the night.
For night scene it is necessary to fake and make a transition from day to night :(

Even Octane, and Arnold have the same limitation. Or maybe there is something i didn't understand.

I hope the New Lightwave render engine will get physical sky and why not a real sky generator with 24 hours realistic sky with stars ;)

Do you like this idea LW3DG ?

CaptainMarlowe
02-25-2016, 10:50 PM
I like this idea !

prometheus
02-26-2016, 11:59 AM
Getting the night sky to be illuminated correctly is one thing...also getting stars in there the other thing, then we got a third factor..the global illumination that affects any item in the scene, and it would often requrie a fourth factor too..the moon light.
so in principle if we got the sun going down, there will not be any direct sun lighting..and depending on location ans season there will be different amount of illuminated sky, which by itself then would be the global illumination, so the question is if there should be radiosity activated and also connected to the proper GI intensity and also color? or should the dp sunsky model be improved with itīs connection to the additional sky_light that is available, which sort of fakes the GI?

Must test it a bit more before saying more.

prometheus
02-26-2016, 05:53 PM
One thing i hope about sun simulation is when to sun is going under the horizon after sunset, the sky colors that i get with DP are far from realistic especially at the begining of the night.
For night scene it is necessary to fake and make a transition from day to night :(

Even Octane, and Arnold have the same limitation. Or maybe there is something i didn't understand.

I hope the New Lightwave render engine will get physical sky and why not a real sky generator with 24 hours realistic sky with stars ;)

Do you like this idea LW3DG ?

revisiting the dp sunsky, I donīt think it is far from realistic...not sure what colors you get?
do you have samples etc? and how it actually should look like, I do not get complete blackness until maybe -4 degrees on the pitch..above that, the colors are red at horizon and a bit more greenish ..the colors are of course highly dependent on type of conversion you choose, try different color systems. like cie, or rec 709 display, and fiddle with exposure and set it to 10000 ..that will bring forth a more deeper cyanblue to darker deeper blue color of the sky.

Photogram
02-29-2016, 12:33 PM
revisiting the dp sunsky, I donīt think it is far from realistic...not sure what colors you get?
do you have samples etc? and how it actually should look like, I do not get complete blackness until maybe -4 degrees on the pitch..above that, the colors are red at horizon and a bit more greenish ..the colors are of course highly dependent on type of conversion you choose, try different color systems. like cie, or rec 709 display, and fiddle with exposure and set it to 10000 ..that will bring forth a more deeper cyanblue to darker deeper blue color of the sky.

Here are some work in progress snapshots.

Actually i didn't found how to get a perfect match with the sun visible.

- The sky dont't match with the sun.
- I don't know how to get realistic sunflare for the sunset.
- Later at 8 PM the sun is just under the horizon. The sky is supposed to be much more illuminated and more orange with a gradient to clear blue at the zenith.

There is so much parameter, that's a bit confusing. I hope someday to have a physical sky module with some good preset that we can start with and then tweak to our taste.
Example of presets:

- Summer morning at equator perfect sky with no clouds.
- Winter sunset in Canada and from there you choose your city and adjust time and weather.
- etc...

Here are some example and a post effect done in Photoshop to show the desired result.

132647132646132645132648

jwiede
02-29-2016, 01:36 PM
Here are some work in progress snapshots.

Actually i didn't found how to get a perfect match with the sun visible.

- The sky dont't match with the sun.

Realistically, the other complaints stem from this one. The sky is nowhere near bright enough when sun's just below the horizon, let alone at or slightly above the horizon. Fix that (and the sun's brightness relative to that, which is also way off) and I suspect most of the rest will sort themselves out.

If LW3DG are reading, hopefully they realize how important an accurate physical sky and sun model is to any "PBR render" engine, and have equipped theirs according for the release. If that means licensing, incorporating, and fixing DP SunSky, so be it, but there needs to be a decent in-box solution from day zero.

prometheus
02-29-2016, 03:05 PM
You can not get a realistic sundisc with sunsky alone, map a lensflare to it with the help of the scripts that follows with sunsky, or add another pointlight to the scene, enter motion options and add the sk_sun motion modifier, itīs a bit whacky if you try and tweak it since it doesnīt seem to update properly with vpr, but it works.

I will try and record and showcase this later.
Also..you might want to try the preetham model ..which I think looks a bit nicer at almost night scenes.

further more, you can also turn that secondary light in to a volumetric light and use that as sundisc, and even more..in the volumetrics tab..you can add the sunsky atmosphere, which will boost the sky a bit with some mie scattering, Haze etc...

Jwiede..I think those issues might be a thing of correcting the exposure, and also set model to preetham, and some other tweaks...might show somethings later.

Heres some old stuff..showcasing some effects on the sky when you add the sk atmosphere, though it would look better for night I think with preetham model...



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaT5IPbN8-0

prometheus
02-29-2016, 03:22 PM
And another one, I noticed that the sunflare is following properly here, in lightwave 2015 though..I have issues with that, I need to check and verify those versions again and see what is going on.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxmCg6dPHGc

dpont
02-29-2016, 03:22 PM
..the sky colors that i get with DP are far from realistic especially at the begining of the night.
For night scene it is necessary to fake and make a transition from day to night :(

Even Octane, and Arnold have the same limitation. Or maybe there is something i didn't understand...

You probably missed several threads on this subject,
as far I know all these sky models from scientists are simulating day light
and they work physically and mathematically with positive sun angle
above the horizon,
colors aren't subjective but objective measures,
but users are also aware that a bad colorspace may corrupt the result,

about the flare, you need to understand that the sun is a 'distant' light,
working only with angle of rotation, and flare post effect calculated
at the real distance of a point light,
in Lightwave with DP Sunsky you have a modifier for matching the sun position,

DP Sunsky has also a Mirror effect which can help to smooth
the sunset and sunrise, a few degrees below the horizon.


Denis.

prometheus
02-29-2016, 03:28 PM
You probably missed several threads on this subject,
as far I know all these sky models from scientists are simulating day light
and they work physically and mathematically with positive sun angle
above the horizon,
colors aren't subjective but objective measures,
but users are also aware that a bad colorspace may corrupt the result,

about the flare, you need to understand that the sun is a 'distant' light,
working only with angle of rotation, and flare post effect calculated
at the real distance of a point light,
in Lightwave with DP Sunsky you have a modifier for matching the sun position,

DP Sunsky has also a Mirror effect which can help to smooth
the sunset and sunrise, a few degrees below the horizon.


Denis.


check my post above yours...where I mentioned that about the sunflare..there seem to be an issue though with vpr not updating the lensflare when rotating the sk_light, but probably only in 2015, as you can see on my previous post and vid..itīs working as it should in 11.6

the other part is probably to pick preetham model for night skies, and also use the atmospheric sunsky in the volumetrics tab.

I am also lowering the inverted exposure value to around 10000 instead of 15000 ..that brightens up the sky at night settings a bit.

dpont
02-29-2016, 11:49 PM
check my post above yours...where I mentioned that about the sunflare..there seem to be an issue though with vpr not updating the lensflare when rotating the sk_light, but probably only in 2015, as you can see on my previous post and vid..itīs working as it should in 11.6...

...I think this is a potential report for VPR,
simplified content scene and steps to reproduce.

Denis.

pinkmouse
03-01-2016, 01:57 AM
I always use the setup script for Sunsky as the Mac version crashes if you try to add all the bits separately, and have an slight issue where the sun disc doesn't quite line up with the sun lens flare:

132663

If you look carefully you can see that the sun disc is slightly offset, look at the 2 o'clock position of the flare.

Not usually a huge problem, but it would be nice to see a fix at some point.

spherical
03-01-2016, 02:53 AM
I always use the setup script for Sunsky as the Mac version crashes if you try to add all the bits separately, and have an slight issue where the sun disc doesn't quite line up with the sun lens flare: If you look carefully you can see that the sun disc is slightly offset, look at the 2 o'clock position of the flare.

And does the same thing happen when the Sun is in the center of the frame?

pinkmouse
03-01-2016, 02:56 AM
Can't remember! :)

I'll try it sometime.

erikals
03-01-2016, 03:50 AM
imo, Lens flares should be custom made

as programmed Lens flares these days do not look realistic enough



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKDdZGlLF38

pinkmouse
03-01-2016, 04:03 AM
Indeed, but that was just a quick render for the speed modelling challenge.

dpont
03-01-2016, 04:08 AM
...If you look carefully you can see that the sun disc is slightly offset, look at the 2 o'clock position of the flare.

Not usually a huge problem, but it would be nice to see a fix at some point.

What is the setup in
the modifier of the Sun Light, is the distance high enough?

Denis.

pinkmouse
03-01-2016, 04:12 AM
Everything is set up by your script, with no changes made apart from time and location. I can probably find and post the scene if it would help?

dpont
03-01-2016, 04:52 AM
Everything is set up by your script, with no changes made apart from time and location. I can probably find and post the scene if it would help?


But the script has nothing to do with the flare problem,

again.. this is not an issue of Sunsky,
the SK Sun Light as a 'Distant' Light and the disk in the background
work with angle rotation, Flare works with the position/distance of the light
by default the SK Sun is placed at a shorter distance
mainly for being easily seen in the scene preview
(like it is commonly when you use a Dome, Infinite or Distant Light)
you need the sun modifier or a way for distancing the Light.

Denis.

pinkmouse
03-01-2016, 04:59 AM
Right, so it's a "feature". :)

Photogram
03-01-2016, 01:14 PM
You probably missed several threads on this subject,


DP Sunsky has also a Mirror effect which can help to smooth
the sunset and sunrise, a few degrees below the horizon.


Denis.

Thanks Denis and sorry for my hard comment "Far from realistic" I would better described as "not so realistic" that was a comment about my poor results. I need to take more time working with DP Sunsky.

I will read the threads on this subject, please can you give me some links to them?

Thanks Prometheus for your videos! i will retry with Lightwave 11.6 and compare. I will also try the other script and link a Light with the sun position with a flare.

I need to study more on that. That project was made in 2012 with Lightwave 11 with relative short delays. When in rush and found DP Sunsky was the best plugin to do the sky, so i learn it in a few days and then finish the job as quick as possible before the deadline.

When i get something more pleasant i will post some new renders :)

Thanks eveybody!

prometheus
03-01-2016, 05:27 PM
I would recomend disabling srgb preset when doing sk sun outdoor scenes.
hereīs some lower level sun..

http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=132690&d=1456878185

and if you throw in hypervoxels for clouds and add a volumetric fog item (my trick) then you got godrays..though I wouldnīt recommend doing this unless knowing what you are doing:D ..extremly slow to render and one might be better of waiting for the new volumetric in lightwave 2016.



http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=132691&d=1456878335

prometheus
03-01-2016, 06:08 PM
Note to myself and to Denis, I think the issue I had with vpr and lensflare not updating is my fault, I was messing too much with a secondary light and using the lensflare and motion modifier on that, that is of course not necessary.
It should be enough enabling the lensflare and just also add the sun motion modifer on the sk_sun, not on the additional light, donīt know why I went that route.

prometheus
03-01-2016, 07:30 PM
One thing I might be willing to chime in on though, depends on, when the sun is going up from a sunrise, and turning the color from red to a brighter sundisc, the sundisc color doesnīt behave naturalistic by itself, it still has too much of yellow or redish tone, to overcome this, One might want to increase disc intensity to 200, or add the sunsky volumetric atmosphere and tweak the settings there, with that atmosphere the sundisc will get a brighter flare.

will have to record and post later.

the best fog option I have come across...that is to use sunsky volumetric atmosphere and also lightwave realistic fog, and not use the backdrop color, but use fog texture and add sunsky as a procedural there, use world coordinates and automatic sizing on that.
with proper max distance in the fog panel, it might look quite decent, that way you can avoid the sundisc showing on top any front objects ..which is what would happen if you were to use backdrop color in the fog option.
and using a simple color for the fog would yield a not so nice fog without any sense of depth...so the best fake..fake it is, is to use fog texture and sunsky procedural from there, but do not mess with the settings too much there, since it also effects the main sunsky environment.

Been messing with the sunflare as well, trying to get color changing properly when the sun is setting, and trying to get the flare to fade itīs intensity when going down, so in the flare intensity channel I add the sunsky color modifer.

All of this is a bit of a mess to set up, sure is simpler to use vue or terragen for it..just lower the sun pitch and all behaves as realistic it can be.

Photogram
03-02-2016, 12:45 AM
Thanks Prometheus!

From your settings in your vids i was able to get a better effect now.
I did the comparaison between LW11.6 and 2015.3
Note that in vpr and for the final render i got similar results but a bit different for each Lightwave version.
Also to get a close match between these two version i have put different values for Sunsky Environement and Sunsky Atmosphere they don't give the same results with equal values :hey:

Here are a more interesting results compare to the old one :)

I'm very happy with the new results! (i prefer the LW2015.3 result)

Thanks :)

132695132696

prometheus
03-02-2016, 05:15 PM
Thanks Prometheus!

From your settings in your vids i was able to get a better effect now.
I did the comparaison between LW11.6 and 2015.3
Note that in vpr and for the final render i got similar results but a bit different for each Lightwave version.
Also to get a close match between these two version i have put different values for Sunsky Environement and Sunsky Atmosphere they don't give the same results with equal values :hey:

Here are a more interesting results compare to the old one :)

I'm very happy with the new results! (i prefer the LW2015.3 result)

Thanks :)

132695132696

You are working with srgb, I wouldnīt do that for exterior scenery, it kills off naturalistic colors and shadows, bleach out pictures unless correcting gamma in post process, for interiors and product shots maybe, but not for terrain and landscape shots..some folks might recommend it, I do not...I mean, I can be wrong about that workflow, I just donīt like the results of it and having to second guess and tweak afterwards.

dpont got a skylight, which sorts of helps add in that ambient lighting, and once the sun is going down, the more light intensity from the skylight could be used, you can tweak the amount of skylight too, acting in the scene, sort of like in vue with ambient light vs direct light, itīs not the same as just raising the skylight intensity.

for stills I would use both sk_sun and skylight, for extra bounce light realism in stills, I may use radiosity..but with global ambience light too, and check ambient occlustion in the radiosity tab, that overrides the global ambien lights flat appearance, but you are using the ambient light as a source too.

I would suggest try go to the color space options, quick presets and disable it, check how it looks.

jwiede
03-02-2016, 06:03 PM
I guess lightwave VPR and the new volumetrics will still be faster and also at full screen mind you

Please cite?

prometheus
03-02-2016, 07:01 PM
Please cite?

Ehh..? cite what and why?

I just commented what I suspect, and with following comments on why it will be faster.

Photogram
03-06-2016, 10:06 AM
You are working with srgb, I wouldnīt do that for exterior scenery, it kills off naturalistic colors and shadows, bleach out pictures unless correcting gamma in post process, for interiors and product shots maybe, but not for terrain and landscape shots..some folks might recommend it, I do not...I mean, I can be wrong about that workflow, I just donīt like the results of it and having to second guess and tweak afterwards.

dpont got a skylight, which sorts of helps add in that ambient lighting, and once the sun is going down, the more light intensity from the skylight could be used, you can tweak the amount of skylight too, acting in the scene, sort of like in vue with ambient light vs direct light, itīs not the same as just raising the skylight intensity.

for stills I would use both sk_sun and skylight, for extra bounce light realism in stills, I may use radiosity..but with global ambience light too, and check ambient occlustion in the radiosity tab, that overrides the global ambien lights flat appearance, but you are using the ambient light as a source too.

I would suggest try go to the color space options, quick presets and disable it, check how it looks.



Thanks Prometheus for your advice :)

It seem not working with my scene. I did try switching to Linear for the color system and for all textures.
The result is simply very dark!!! (see attached, this is the same scene but in Linear mode)
- I did boost every value and did not get much brighter lightning.
- My project doesn't use GI so no feature here are usefull fur me. (I need very fast render time) This is already 8 minutes per frames in HD.

I think i have to redo all light setup to be able to work in linear. Anyway i prefer working in sRGB because the constrast ratio give more realistic gradients on surfaces. (Even they are washed)
I have worked many years in Linear and as i remembered it was taking more time and more lights with radius to create interesting exterior fake GI scene. Now with sRGB and DP Sunsky it is pretty straightfoward and more intuitive. (that's my experience)

Maybe i missed something about making exterior scenes with Linear ?132780

prometheus
03-06-2016, 05:03 PM
Thanks Prometheus for your advice :)



It seem not working with my scene. I did try switching to Linear for the color system and for all textures.
The result is simply very dark!!! (see attached, this is the same scene but in Linear mode)
- I did boost every value and did not get much brighter lightning.
- My project doesn't use GI so no feature here are usefull fur me. (I need very fast render time) This is already 8 minutes per frames in HD.

I think i have to redo all light setup to be able to work in linear. Anyway i prefer working in sRGB because the constrast ratio give more realistic gradients on surfaces. (Even they are washed)
I have worked many years in Linear and as i remembered it was taking more time and more lights with radius to create interesting exterior fake GI scene. Now with sRGB and DP Sunsky it is pretty straightfoward and more intuitive. (that's my experience)

Maybe i missed something about making exterior scenes with Linear ?132780

I think you may boost the wrong values that needs to be boosted..
honestly I think that image is looking better than your other with all set to srgb, I donīt like working in srgb and I perceive it as a calibration hack that mostly yields bleached out images and canīt be used as is, unless post processing the gamma or tone mapping.
I am all for what you see is what you get directly in the scene, so that I would not have to second guess or post process it too much..best is if I donīt have to at all.

not sure how many lights you got there in the scene, the colors in the sky looks more natural as they should be compared to the other picture you posted, then you got the issue of dark environment on the buildings, streets, vegetation etc...but think about the real world for a minute, a sun at that level, and also facing the camera, the surroundings get much darker unless street lights or building lights is there,
the only other thing lighting the environment up is and should be the actual sky ..simply global illumination, so you can either actually use GI illumination, if you would try out vue for instance, you simply check that illumination if you want realisting light bouncing from the sky, itīs the same with Lightwave, a hack is to use the skylight, but you may have to raise the intensity quite a bit over 100%, depends on.

You can also hack it with a dome light, or use both GI and skylight together, in the lights panel and the properties for the skylight, you may want to raise the amount of skylight as I mentioned before.
to further help boost up exterior lighting with global illumination, you can raise the ambient light to 50 or even 100% if you follow those advices, you can not possible get any dark surroundings...ambient lighting will get a flat look generally, but together with GI you can avoid that...by checking the ambient occlusion right under radiosity, it will fix issues with ambient lighting being flat.

you just need to boost up the skylight a bit more, or/and activate radiosity (for animation you need to learn to do flickerfree radiosity)
the skylight also needs more samples to get rid of the noise, though you just may have posted a test.

I have no issues with too dark images, you simply need to use the right illumination, which is GI or hack it with domelights or skylight, I prefer that way rather than ruining the naturalistic colors of the sky and bleaching out the overall image with srgb, and I get what I want directly in the vpr and first renders.

In the real world ..light scattered from the sky and down to the ground also bounces infinite around the surroundings, skylight and dome light donīt do that, they only flood fill any items in the scene, but do not actually bounce the lights, so for ultimate realism, you may want radiosity..it may come at rendertimes costs and issues working with flicker free animation.
One can often see a difference in still shots made for archviz, where many folks seem to use true radiosity...and animated featured films where they simply only use ambient occlusion, those still shots could look amazing..and in some feature films you can tell spot on that it is missing true bounced light illumination.

Check this thread...
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?149988-360-degree-lighting&p=1468198#post1468198

prometheus
03-07-2016, 05:29 AM
hereīs some images showing the same settings, right click on the large image and show image then zoom in if you want to see the panel settings..
100% radiosity, but also with ambient light intensity at a step level of 5% for each image, the bottom image has no ambient light intensity, and when it reaches above 10% ..it starts to get unrealisticly too bright for showcasing a scenery when the sun is in front of the cam, and also going down at the horizon.

If one were to be out in the woods..with the sun at this level, it would start to get very dark..in a city like this, there would of course be other lights illuminating it all, and the radiosity model would need to evaluate that too for best realism.
I just downloaded a simple sketchup model ..did nothing to it, so for a showcase it will have to do :)

I could throw in a skylight as well, and raise the intensity to over 150% or 200%..and one would see some interesting illumination, will have to showcase that with some other models, noticed that this scene becomes extremly slow , but because of it having a lot of layers, and 400 000 polygons, and working in 32 bit, all that is no good combination.

the sunsky has a turbidity of 3%..and with that comes a more redish orange sky, since there are more pollution in the sky so to speak, if there was a little colder night, such stuff may not be there so much, thus setting a level of 1 or 2 would make the night sky appear more cyan in the tone.


http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=132785&d=1457353686

prometheus
03-07-2016, 05:35 AM
This thread have spinned to be a sort of sunsky for lightwave thread...but anyway

heresīs more samples of it and a little higher sun in the sky...notice the issue of lensflare not aligning properly with the sundisc, when you apply sk_sun motion in the motion tab for the sunlight, it is set by default to 1km, but it will be wrongly offset, so a distance of 60 km may be more appropiate, I also make the lensflare fade in distance with a nominal distance to 60 km as well and make it glow behind objects, one can also set an envelope in the lensflare intensity and add the sk_sun color, manually three times for each channel, that may help reducing the amount of sunflare when it goes down..but itīs tricky, I donīt think itīs as nice as vueīs sunflare behavior and itīs progressive settings etc.


http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=132786&d=1457353808

Photogram
03-09-2016, 12:29 PM
This thread have spinned to be a sort of sunsky for lightwave thread...but anyway

heresīs more samples of it and a little higher sun in the sky...notice the issue of lensflare not aligning properly with the sundisc, when you apply sk_sun motion in the motion tab for the sunlight, it is set by default to 1km, but it will be wrongly offset, so a distance of 60 km may be more appropiate, I also make the lensflare fade in distance with a nominal distance to 60 km as well and make it glow behind objects, one can also set an envelope in the lensflare intensity and add the sk_sun color, manually three times for each channel, that may help reducing the amount of sunflare when it goes down..but itīs tricky, I donīt think itīs as nice as vueīs sunflare behavior and itīs progressive settings etc.


http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=132786&d=1457353808

Hello Prometheus,

Sorry i'm a bit busy so no new renders on my side.

I like your last render!
Did you only raise up the sun to get this much brighter and realistic result?

When i get more time i will continue on my archvis project and send new renders...

Thanks for your helpfull posts :)

:thumbsup:

prometheus
03-10-2016, 02:21 AM
Hello Prometheus,

Sorry i'm a bit busy so no new renders on my side.

I like your last render!
Did you only raise up the sun to get this much brighter and realistic result?

When i get more time i will continue on my archvis project and send new renders...

Thanks for your helpfull posts :)

:thumbsup:



yes I think so..the previous ones where having the sun much lower and obscured by a building too, so the last I just raised the sun, but...you got to have radiosity on ..montecarlo here, and also some ambient light..not sure exactly what level that was..but I think it was pretty low, just try it yourself with some levels as I have shown in those previous images..and make sure you check radiosity ambient occlusion so the ambient light effect donīt just get flat.
I did not use the srgb presets, all those were disabled.

Photogram
03-26-2016, 09:54 AM
Hello Prometheus,

I finally got some time to rework my sunset scene..
I prefer my new result :)
Still using sRGB and tweaking my render with image control for the exposure and this is what i got.
I do many changes and i loose all the blue from the sky and from radiosity on surfaces..
While changing settings from render to renders i didn't find again that blue i was loving. Now my scene is reddish and i want some gradient to blue to cool the atmosphere...
There's also an unpleasant gray line at the botton of horizon in the bird view..

Any idea?

133120133121

spherical
03-26-2016, 02:20 PM
I like that line. Whether it is unintended or not, it looks like a nice haze layer. Not broken, IMO.

prometheus
03-27-2016, 08:31 AM
Hello Prometheus,

I finally got some time to rework my sunset scene..
I prefer my new result :)
Still using sRGB and tweaking my render with image control for the exposure and this is what i got.
I do many changes and i loose all the blue from the sky and from radiosity on surfaces..
While changing settings from render to renders i didn't find again that blue i was loving. Now my scene is reddish and i want some gradient to blue to cool the atmosphere...
There's also an unpleasant gray line at the botton of horizon in the bird view..

Any idea?

133120133121


As I have mentioned a lot before, srgb will not yield the naturalistic colors and I think it is affecting your blue tone sky too to some degree, if you continue to work with srgb presets..I think you will continue to struggle with having "wrong" skycolors.

There are things you can do though to make it more bluish while still having the sun going down...change turbidity to a very low value, turbidity means some sort of pollution in the air, which means giving a more polluted often more reddish sky tone..in the case of the turbidity settings in sunsky, I don īt think thereīs any distinction from which type of particles it is to simulate, could be water particles, dust, etc, a setting of 1 is the lowest I think you can get away with..that should avoid any turbidity picking up sun color..and thus the sky should be more clear.

Then you got the conversion tab..try various color modes cie,rgb etc..my favourite is rec 709 display which seems to retain the blue color the most.

you can also add texture environment and a pitch gradient and manually set a blue color of your liking to blend in with the sunsky, but if your not careful..it will not look right.

The haze line...that is probably because you have volumetric fog in there right? and that has no sense of true z-depth, and it will abruptly break the horizon between sunsky backdrop environment and the fog with a sharp line, you can use backdrop as fog..but that will not be physicly correct either, since that will yield the backdrop imposed over any object in front of the camera, depending on max distance on the fog, you can do a trick instead of using fog texture and sunsky as fog and set it to world coordinates and it may look better..but itīs not a correct way to do it.
using sunsky as backdrop fog or in the fog texture will let you blend the backdrop sky and the fog very nicely..to avoid that sharp line you now got, but it will impose those other issues I just mentioned.

there is no way to produce a physical fog that blends out in distance directly in vpr or final render like vue or terragen does it, some trick you can do with applying hypervoxels fog layers may work..but it is render time consuming.

It seems you are using a fog with some greyish tone...it is a problem with this type of fog, fog always pick up sun or scatters light and color to some degree depending on weather, and that standard fog color is static and do not pick up any sunligh to change the color..thus unrealistic fog.

prometheus
03-27-2016, 09:07 AM
In the sky editing tab of sunsky, you can also try some slight increasement in contrast..or saturation.

erikals
03-27-2016, 09:25 AM
you might wanna render in nonlinear, then add Tone Mapping with the DP plugin
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?71751-Extra-Buffer-nodes&p=1390043&viewfull=1#post1390043

gerry_g
03-27-2016, 01:39 PM
don't think he has volumetric fog, ground mist/fog whatever it's called yes, hard line is dead giveaway, figured out if your entire scene is around a meter across it gave a nice soft horizon line but anything at real world scale with the horizon being say a kilometres or more away it looked crap. The lack of tonal depth with sRGB I think is intentional from the renderer point of view as this is desirable when outputting for compositing where any additional depth of tone would be added back through an occlusion pass, doing everything in render lacks flexibility

prometheus
03-27-2016, 02:00 PM
don't think he has volumetric fog, ground mist/fog whatever it's called yes, hard line is dead giveaway, figured out if your entire scene is around a meter across it gave a nice soft horizon line but anything at real world scale with the horizon being say a kilometres or more away it looked crap. The lack of tonal depth with sRGB I think is intentional from the renderer point of view as this is desirable when outputting for compositing where any additional depth of tone would be added back through an occlusion pass, doing everything in render lacks flexibility

I disagree on both, the line is above the ground..and you can clearly see some tone of "fog" on the objects, thus I believe it is fog in the scene..could of course be wrong..so the OP has to verify that.

I also disagree with doing everything in renderer, if you can get it done in render without post..the better, thereīs no need of occlusion if you are using radiosity in the environment.

But it may depend on scene and what other type of elements you are suppose to have in the scene.

jwiede
03-27-2016, 03:01 PM
I also disagree with doing everything in renderer, if you can get it done in render without post..the better, thereīs no need of occlusion if you are using radiosity in the environment.

But it may depend on scene and what other type of elements you are suppose to have in the scene.

Radiosity can theoretically eliminate need for occlusion (also given realistic enough lighting), but practically, enhancing with occlusion is common. Few are apparently willing to take the render time hit needed for the level of lighting and/or radiosity detail required to yield realistic results from radiosity alone.

prometheus
03-27-2016, 03:06 PM
Radiosity can theoretically eliminate need for occlusion (also given realistic enough lighting), but practically, enhancing with occlusion is common. Few are apparently willing to take the render time hit needed for the level of lighting and/or radiosity detail required to yield realistic results from radiosity alone.

True..at least for animation sequences perhaps, and you may want to look at octane in such case as well, lw guru has something going on with some kind of atmospheric effects in octane and some nodes, not sure if it can yield direct fog working in full zdepth within the scene etc.
For stills though..I donīt see why radiosity shouldnīt be used.

Practicly though..as for rendering out a spaceship with oclusion which then also is composited in with other live photage ..ala prometheus ship, it will be faster with occlusion, and may need that control..but even at that high level, I myself could tell the lighting isnīt correct and realistic to the hyperlevel so to speak, since it is indeed a fake illumination trick, if they had rendered out the ship in a vue environement..the lighting would have been more realistic ..if done right, the problem with that though..it would be the render times, and not getting enough realistic clouds..so the more practical and postprocessing with live photage sky and occlusion pass was perhaps to prefer.

no matter what..each method has some weakness.


I myself fiddle a bit with the voxel trick for volumetric atmospheres, it requires editing a lot of channels within the voxel though.

gerry_g
03-27-2016, 03:17 PM
ok may be wrong but ground fog can hide the horizon line well as long it is not more than around 1.5km from camera further out than that it goes hard for some reason but it can work well as in this test proxy scene setup – this is sRGB space HDR sky plate with realistic fog and ground fog turned on, rendered Monte Carlo with volumetric Radiosity checked on

prometheus
03-27-2016, 03:45 PM
ok may be wrong but ground fog can hide the horizon line well as long it is not more than around 1.5km from camera further out than that it goes hard for some reason but it can work well as in this test proxy scene setup – this is sRGB space HDR sky plate with realistic fog and ground fog turned on, rendered Monte Carlo with volumetric Radiosity checked on

Yes..it may work, though I recall it being slow to render oddly, right now I am messing with a single voxel fog layer to see what I can come up with, though it is mainly for adding a global fog layer, so itīs a bit tricky to apply so that the fog is only up to a certain height level...since I can not control the hypervoxels height with any channel layer directly..like the pitch level in textured environment, I have to enter node editor and fiddle with some nodes to get that done...alternativly fiddle with the position and stretching of the hypervoxels..or perhaps an image gradient.

May post those experiments in the other thread later soon or in a new thread.
that trick I use is basicly the same as in my fake godray thread.

The dp_sunsky atmosphere might help with softening the horizon edge as well, it may not show in this clip though..but so you know what part I am talking about..


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxmCg6dPHGc

prometheus
03-27-2016, 03:52 PM
and in this you can see how my voxel fog layer actually are so dense in the distance, so you can get a direct presentation of a fog layer in vpr that "erases" any visibility in the distance..thus no sharp horizon, though it may not look quite realistic since it has a backrop image in this case, that doesnīt respond to the other settings ..thus the darker opacity parts.
If it were a full sunsky backdrop model..I would have no clouds, but a proper sky responding more correctly.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbkvT_HgKRs

gerry_g
03-27-2016, 05:02 PM
standard fog or ground fog is very fast and is easy to control with near clip distance but for ground fog hight control worsens with scale of scene and is useless when you get to big distances of 14km and above, I usually steer clear of hypervoxels because of the render hit and the slow set up time plus fog settings are tied to camera, so if you swap camera they remain constant

prometheus
03-27-2016, 05:27 PM
standard fog or ground fog is very fast and is easy to control with near clip distance but for ground fog hight control worsens with scale of scene and is useless when you get to big distances of 14km and above, I usually steer clear of hypervoxels because of the render hit and the slow set up time plus fog settings are tied to camera, so if you swap camera they remain constant


well..standard fog will not be able to soften out the horizon when used with sunsky, so that is out of the question, unless checking use backdrop color, but then you are facing issues of the backdrop edge being visible over some objects..unless setting the max distance so far away that it in practice will not do itīs work of blending the horizon.

Denis made a special fix with the sunsky..so that you have a mirror mode to sort of fake soften that out, but I have come to the conclusion that itīs still no good, and fog texture will not let you work the magic either, unless perhaps use fog texture and apply the sunsky procedural from there.

Ground fog..well, not sure about that one, I havenīt been able to get decent fog with it..it may help soften edge, but itīs not yielding realistic fog for the rest of the scene.

My trickery with hypervoxels..can be quite decently fast considering it is volumetric, but you have to know what buttons makes it slow and to push it, for my model I turn of volumetric shadows, and you can get away with lower quality, and by setting the hypervoxel near distance with a proper distance..it will render faster.

prometheus
03-27-2016, 05:43 PM
must add, using the preetham model, will show a much better blend when using backdrop color as a fog and let the sunsky backdrop work with the standard realistic fog, if you choose the hosek wilkie model, you will get a more realistic sky, but it will yield a much sharper edge imposed over any object than the preetham model does.

Michael

Photogram
04-03-2016, 04:11 PM
I disagree on both, the line is above the ground..and you can clearly see some tone of "fog" on the objects, thus I believe it is fog in the scene..could of course be wrong..so the OP has to verify that.


Hello :)

I put some new touches on that scene and i want to thanks everybody who gave good advices.
I can confirm i was using Realistic Fog and no ground fog.
The gray line at the horizon is a plane that i need for when i do birds views around the theather.

In theses examples you can see two preview:
The first one is with fog + Sunsky Atmosphere
The second one is without fog + Sunsky Atmosphere

133254133253

I then changed the sky conversion colors to Rec 709 Display and HSV Exposure and i got my blue sky back.
Before i was using CIE Rec 709 with RGB Exposure and my scene was reddish...
Another important thing i have change that was the major cause to the grey line is the Horizon Haze in Sunsky Atmosphere parameter.
My problematic setting was Horizon Haze 3% and now i set it to 100% and i have a nice horizon blend with no gray line.
It seem's the Sunsky Atmosphere is adding it's gradient over the object from far to near, i say this because when i put my plane at the horizon to 100 transparent i can still see it in the haze !
So the solution was not to dissolve my geometry but make it behind the fog and this is the reason i added the LW Realistic Fog over the Sunsky Atmosphere.
I still use sRGB and don't want to change all my surfaces because there are too many and will be time consuming (326 surfaces)
For the Model this is Hosek and Wilkie
And i prefer that result :)

See my very recent result that is my most favorite since i begin to do the sunset atmosphere for this project.

As alway's i'm open to comments :)

133255133257

prometheus
04-03-2016, 04:46 PM
I then changed the sky conversion colors to Rec 709 Display and HSV Exposure and i got my blue sky back.
Before i was using CIE Rec 709 with RGB Exposure and my scene was reddish...


133255

I told you so..didnīt I :)

Good itīs working a bit better now, and yes ..it looks better, regarding the sunflare, I think you could lower the lensflare streak sharpness a bit.

SRgb..understood, guess you have to post process it then, if you can and want to, or perhaps add the post process directly in image processing...virtual darkroom.

yes...realistic fog and the sunsky atmosphere together can be tricky, one has to try and tweak..itīs in those circumstances when working with an atmosphere with fog and volumetrics I really would prefer to work in vue, it just works without mixing a lot of panels here and there that also isnīt designed to work with eachother.


The edge in your image is definitly looking better with realistic fog together with sunsky atmosphere, the only thing that isnīt correct..and no real good way of correcting it..the realistic fog you are using, it will have the same color static no matter how the sun is positioned..and as I have said before, particle dust/fog/mist in the real world...picks up light and color from the sun and isnīt static, so it isnīt quite realistic because of that...in vue it is a true volumetric fog layer which reacts to the sun properly.

You can fake this by setting the backdrop fog color to "use backdrop" ..but it has some other issues by doing that, unfortunatly and strangely, I donīt understand why the lw team couldnīt implement an envelope for the fog color, so you could enter that channel and in the envelope add the sk_suncolor modifier, that would change the color of the fog based on the sunpitch, and yield far more realistic fog.

If the new volumetrics will be what I excpect it to be in the upcoming lw, it is a chance we can use volumetric voxel layers as true fog layers..if it behaves fast enough, we can already do that..but can be a bit slow..depending on,

Photogram
04-03-2016, 05:12 PM
Thanks :)

Yes it could be a good idea to tweak in post process. I have very few knowledge of these post-processing and no experience with Virtual Darkroom. It is working with VPR?

For my Realistic Fog it is using Backdrop Colors.

I'm not sure if the DP plugins will work in the Lightwave Next. Maybe a new update to Sunsky will be needed and maybe will make uses of the new Lightwave volumetric system ;)

prometheus
04-03-2016, 07:35 PM
Thanks :)

Yes it could be a good idea to tweak in post process. I have very few knowledge of these post-processing and no experience with Virtual Darkroom. It is working with VPR?

For my Realistic Fog it is using Backdrop Colors.

I'm not sure if the DP plugins will work in the Lightwave Next. Maybe a new update to Sunsky will be needed and maybe will make uses of the new Lightwave volumetric system ;)

Nope...none of the image processing filters will work in vpr as I know of..so any srgb scene that needs postprocessing, will not be able to be fine tuned directly in vpr...thatīs one part why I donīt like to guess work and post process it after
I am working with landscape scenery, I want to see it as directly as possible...as much as I can.

Have to see about the upcoming lightwave, if the dp sunsky isnīt working..I am quite sure denis will do a fix...it may also be possible that the lw team has implemented their own new model for sky like that...but that is only hoping.
Depending on how the volumetrics looks once it is released..and if they have done something additional to the actual true volumetric fog layers..I might spare myself from gettin vue or terragen..if not, then I think itīs time to do a serious test between vue and terragen and finally jumping in on one of those, only been testing ple versions...but the volumetric and atmospheric engine..And exterior radiosity is far superior in vue compared to lightwave, renders quite fast too considering..if you would compare to throwing in equal fog layers, cloud layers, radiosity in lightwave.

If you do not want any atmospheric effect or volumetric...go with Lightwave, but otherwise..it may be a good idea to look at a landscape software, now most exterior and architect viz, are mostly presented without that need....so standard programs and modo and lightwave and the likes will do fine for that, if you want more of concept art and actual matte paintings...vue might be very ideal for it.

Michael