PDA

View Full Version : LW Next Tiger Render



gamedesign1
06-01-2017, 10:54 AM
For those of you who do not have access to facebook, here is a post from Lino using LW Next Native Renderer and FiberFX :)
136961

wyattharris
06-01-2017, 11:01 AM
Liking what I see.
Thanks, I do not have the Facebook.

Cobalt
06-01-2017, 11:13 AM
Good grief that looks great!

prometheus
06-01-2017, 11:41 AM
looks really great, there will however always be a comparison towards real long curly hair, so a curly long haired brunette, black haired, and and a blonde is required..so some shots of that please..and perhaps add it there, so we others without facebook also can follow it properly..

And in case they have forgotten, here´s the section where it belongs...and please add additional feature description teaser info....
https://blog.lightwave3d.com/2015/11/fiberfx/

Markc
06-01-2017, 11:52 AM
Agree with Prometheus.
Surely any marketing/updates could be in a thread here in the forums.
I am also a non-facebook user :D

djwaterman
06-01-2017, 12:04 PM
I've been comparing the Octane render and LW native render side by side, I think it is glaring that the LW render is way better, more realistic and brighter. White subjects are very testing, on FB Lino put up a LW render and then updated it with the one in this thread. I'm glad to see something that lives up to the promises that have been made. I guess they're in the process of getting images together to showcase LW on release, when ever that happens.

hrgiger
06-01-2017, 12:42 PM
Yup, great work from Lino. The tiger model was made by Mauro Corveloni.

Signal to Noise
06-01-2017, 12:46 PM
I've been comparing the Octane render and LW native render side by side, I think it is glaring that the LW render is way better, more realistic and brighter. ....

Interesting. I initially thought the Octane render looked more "crispy" & "alive". Will have to view again when I can access FB away from work.

VermilionCat
06-01-2017, 01:01 PM
I also prefer Octane rendered image. Looks more natural.

Axis3d
06-01-2017, 02:01 PM
Can someone with the Octane render post that one for the rest of us to check out?

MAUROCOR
06-01-2017, 02:17 PM
Can someone with the Octane render post that one for the rest of us to check out?

https://scontent.fcgh7-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/18766084_10213129906470591_9037735766876366348_n.j pg?oh=b6d4a64d815ede7ebd1e3230cd87ff5e&oe=59E3734C

Asticles
06-01-2017, 02:21 PM
I prefer Lwnext's hands down. The hair seems more natural to me.

JCG
06-01-2017, 02:34 PM
If all this silent waiting gets us fibers of that quality, I'll be more than happy to wait in silence again :)

souzou
06-01-2017, 02:35 PM
Both look amazing. I prefer the nose on the LWN render and eyes on the Octane render. I think the hair in the LWN render has a softer quality to it, I don't know if it's more realistic but it looks great.

wingzeta
06-01-2017, 03:02 PM
The two renders have very different contrasts, so it is hard to compare, not knowing what post work has been done, or maybe needs to be done regarding gamma. It is a very nice image, modeling, texturing. The FiberFX is incredible! Big level up. The LW PBR is looking awesome. Keep this stuff coming. It would be nice to see some arch viz PBR renders, or a scene with a character and complex background.

Great work!

50one
06-01-2017, 03:27 PM
Yup native one looks more natural to me.

Ernest
06-01-2017, 06:26 PM
Nice!
Clearly someone combed the tiger between the Octane shot and the LW one ;)

Did they post anything on the rendertimes in LW and/or Octane?

c.1
06-01-2017, 07:03 PM
Did they post anything on the rendertimes in LW and/or Octane?

From what I could find in FB land, the render times were:

Octane: 20 minutes

Native LW(next): 40 minutes

Ernest
06-01-2017, 07:40 PM
Thanks!

Ernest
06-01-2017, 07:56 PM
Thanks!

erikals
06-01-2017, 09:05 PM
From what I could find in FB land, the render times were:

Octane: 20 minutes
Native LW(next): 40 minutes

i wonder what machine specs though?...

i like the Octane render more, but Next looks quite alright.

thought the Octane render would be faster, maybe the GPU was so-so...

hrgiger
06-01-2017, 10:56 PM
Next was rendered on an octacore CPU. Octane was rendered with two titans and two blacks.

erikals
06-01-2017, 11:12 PM
wow, thought Octane would be much faster. but honestly my Octane knowledge is limited.

i'm also quite curious to see how Next handles instancing with AA... we shall see... :)

if LWG wants to give this LW Grass Scene a shot...

right-click, save as...
http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=110739&d=1359399236

djwaterman
06-01-2017, 11:45 PM
The Octane render has lots of burnout hot spots in the white fur, the hair also looks dirty overall and that probably wasn't the intent and the black stripes aren't as black as they should be. I mean it does look pretty good but once you see the LW render it gets put into context and looks less impressive.

bazsa73
06-02-2017, 12:18 AM
I will show this to my coworker who did tiger fur in Houdini a day ago, he will be envious.

erikals
06-02-2017, 12:25 AM
the hair also looks dirty overall
yes, it's due to a 'mini-bug'.
if you look closely, you can see the forehead fur in the Octane render is skewed. (marked red)

http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=136965&d=1496384634
136965

both nice renders, both can be tweaked to compensate.

erikals
06-02-2017, 12:34 AM
if you look at the Next nose bridge, you'll see that the hair looks more flat, this is where Octane comes in to play, as there is much less 'compression' in the render.
however, a biased render can fix/cheat this by adding length/distortion to the hair.

not a complaint, just differences. LW for example kicks at NPR.

50one
06-02-2017, 01:07 AM
The eyes on LW really sell the image anyway.



if you look at the Next nose bridge, you'll see that the hair looks more flat, this is where Octane comes in to play, as there is much less 'compression' in the render.
however, a biased render can fix/cheat this by adding length/distortion to the hair.

not a complaint, just differences. LW for example kicks at NPR.

The thing is, even if those are bugs/error they really add to the natural look and Octane render looks just too clean and uniform, yes it's nice, but doesn't feel "real".

wingzeta
06-02-2017, 01:44 AM
Looks like the Octane render has a bit more dynamic range, holding a little more detail. The reflections in the eyes are more pronounced for instance. Since octane uses different materials they are not quite the same. The striping is significantly different. It's not just more detailed, the pattern is more broken up, meaning there is actually more detail in the octane map, or it reads fibers very differently. So, is it a different map, or a slightly different procedural, or what? You could break up the striping on the LW surface too, with some texture work. That makes it hard to say whether the differences in apparent detail are because Octane shows more detail, or if the surface has more detail. Both look nice. Obviously you can tweak the render to get them closer together one way or another. The real news seems to be how good fiberFX looks in either case. I wonder what this would look like animated.

creacon
06-02-2017, 02:29 AM
4 cards? That would be the equivalent of 2 Titan Xp's, more or less, right?


Next was rendered on an octacore CPU. Octane was rendered with two titans and two blacks.

jwiede
06-02-2017, 02:35 AM
I also prefer Octane rendered image. Looks more natural.

There are definitely some aspects of the Octane picture which look more "real", IMO as well. Note how the Octane version really conveys the pale translucency of the whiskers' shading, while the LW Next version's whiskers' shading appears more flat and white (esp. seen in lower-right quadrant). The LW Next image is nice, but IMO the fibre shading in the Octane image has more detail and better sense of translucency overall. Also, quite visible in the hair distribution patterns on the top of the snout, LW Next hair's symmetry looks kind of "CG near-perfect" mirrored, where in comparison, the Octane version has visible asymmetry and looks a bit more "real/natural" as a result.

It's all minor details, to be sure, they're both great renderings. The devil is in details for such photorealism, though, and in the fine details of the hair fibres the Octane image still does seem to beat the LW Next image both in fibre layout/styling as well as the fibre "material" shadings (IMO, anyway).

jwiede
06-02-2017, 02:47 AM
Looks like the Octane render has a bit more dynamic range, holding a little more detail. The reflections in the eyes are more pronounced for instance. Since octane uses different materials they are not quite the same. The striping is significantly different. It's not just more detailed, the pattern is more broken up, meaning there is actually more detail in the octane map, or it reads fibers very differently. So, is it a different map, or a slightly different procedural, or what? You could break up the striping on the LW surface too, with some texture work. That makes it hard to say whether the differences in apparent detail are because Octane shows more detail, or if the surface has more detail. Both look nice. Obviously you can tweak the render to get them closer together one way or another. The real news seems to be how good fiberFX looks in either case. I wonder what this would look like animated.


Agreed, I also think the Octane image definitely has more range/"depth" in the shading of the fibres, it's quite obvious when you see the side-by-side. The LW Next image tends towards more "perfect" whites and blacks, where you can clearly see more variation and shading range in the Octane fibres. I'd hope the LW Next could match those aspects, but it does appear the artist for the Octane image used more complex materials/shading as well as more complex texturing/procedurals driving the shading. The Octane artist also seems to have achieved a more realistic variation beyond just algorithmic symmetry in the styling of the fibres, possibly an indication of more complex texturing/procedurals driving the Octane version's fibre styling as well.

Without being able to assess the actual textures/procedurals, and how they fit into styling and materials/shading, it's difficult to draw any conclusions -- there's no easy way to tell how much of the apparent quality differences stem from the styling/shading/rendering engines themselves versus the engines being given deeper / more complex driving textures/procedurals in Octane vs LW Next.

erikals
06-02-2017, 02:50 AM
The eyes on LW really sell the image anyway.

The thing is, even if those are bugs/error they really add to the natural look and Octane render looks just too clean and uniform, yes it's nice, but doesn't feel "real".

i think the opposite.
Octane is Left, Next is Right.

the Octane 'mini-bug' is due to the color doesn't start at the root, like it should, thereby, giving a more 'rough' look.
albeit the 'rough' look is also partly due to the more detailed unbiased render.

http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=136965&d=1496384634

jwiede
06-02-2017, 02:58 AM
the Octane 'mini-bug' is due to the color doesn't start at the root, like it should, thereby, giving a more 'rough' look.

I disagree, the snout hair in both clearly shows both sets of fibres have full shading from roots outwards.

BTW, another area where the Octane image clearly has more range/detail than the LW Next version is in the eyes' iris materials. The more pronounced texturing of the nose skin is another such example (note how both iris and nose skin have high-frequency and low-frequency patterning evident in the Octane texturing, suggesting more layers of textures/procedurals were used). However, again, without looking at precisely how each engine's materials are being driven, it is difficult to isolate whether any is due to engine limitations, much more likely the Octane version simply had more detail in engine inputs (texturing/procedurals).

Whatever the cause, the Octane rendering has significantly more detail in numerous areas/aspects compared to the LW Next rendering.

Asticles
06-02-2017, 03:10 AM
I still prefer LWNext's one, it makes me think about a real film footage.

rustythe1
06-02-2017, 03:27 AM
yes, to me it looks like the octane one just came out of the water (maybe he is "tiger in the wild") and the LW one just looks like one you want to cuddle (maybe he is "tiger in the zoo") the octane one to me seems to maybe have a more random length of hair which shifts the patterns up and down and also why I think it has a more sticky out matted effect, where as the LWN one is much more combed and separated allowing the pattern to show through much better, its very evident just above the mouth, the octane one has completely lost the stripes from the underline control image, in fact I would go as far as saying there are major placement errors around that area, maybe the hairs are not respecting the poly normal or smoothed normal?

erikals
06-02-2017, 03:37 AM
yeah, some disagreements here, though looks like we all agree LightWave Next FiberFX is looking quite good :)

for comparison, Life of Pi >

http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=136968&d=1496396214
136968

Ernest
06-02-2017, 04:07 AM
4 cards? That would be the equivalent of 2 Titan Xp's, more or less, right?

I'm not sure about Octane. XP can be more than twice as fast as Black, but in multirendering it is only 64% faster.



I think you get the expected result from each renderer. The Octane one looks more unbiased and the LW one looks more art-directed.

wingzeta
06-02-2017, 04:09 AM
The difference in texturing really does make it hard to say, as I know given the current version of LW, I could tweak things to bring out the iris detail out, or break up stripes. Not to say it would look nearly as good, just that the LW PBR materials need a little tweaking to offer a fully equivalent shot. That way we could really look at render alone, without having to factor in texturing artistry.

Of course, let's not lose sight of the fact that this is a really great looking render "out of the box" in LW. Comparing it to a "deluxe" third party GPU render solution like Octane, on equal terms really shouldn't be the point. It is enough to say "Look at this, with a bit more time, this can give a result, that is very much in the ballpark of high end render solutions, and it is right out of the box". It should be a calling card feature for LW. As long as it is CPU only, Octane will still be the choice for speed, and perhaps a bump in fidelity. But for the majority of users, this new render looks like a big jump in quality. I hope we get to see more soon.

creacon
06-02-2017, 04:15 AM
Does anybody know if Octane uses double precision for rendering?

creacon

erikals
06-02-2017, 04:28 AM
for the majority of users, this new render looks like a big jump in quality. I hope we get to see more soon.
Absolutely. just looking at the Life of Pi reference (most likely a biased render) we can see how close the Next render is. Not bad LWG, not bad at all. :)

rustythe1
06-02-2017, 05:37 AM
The difference in texturing really does make it hard to say, as I know given the current version of LW, I could tweak things to bring out the iris detail out, or break up stripes. Not to say it would look nearly as good, just that the LW PBR materials need a little tweaking to offer a fully equivalent shot. That way we could really look at render alone, without having to factor in texturing artistry.

Of course, let's not lose sight of the fact that this is a really great looking render "out of the box" in LW. Comparing it to a "deluxe" third party GPU render solution like Octane, on equal terms really shouldn't be the point. It is enough to say "Look at this, with a bit more time, this can give a result, that is very much in the ballpark of high end render solutions, and it is right out of the box". It should be a calling card feature for LW. As long as it is CPU only, Octane will still be the choice for speed, and perhaps a bump in fidelity. But for the majority of users, this new render looks like a big jump in quality. I hope we get to see more soon.

I think lino stated it wasn't PBR and was ray MC render on the FB page

TheLexx
06-02-2017, 05:57 AM
So, for rendering times we appear to be on the verge of another shake-up in CPU tech. Intel has announced an 18 core i9 chip (http://www.zdnet.com/article/intel-unveils-monster-18-core-core-i9-first-teraflop-speed-consumer-pc-chip/), and AMD has the upcoming Threadripper (http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/amd-threadripper-specs-technology)of 16 core 32 threads. Would a small render farm of half a dozen such chips turbo charge CPU rendering for LW Next compared to Octane on a decent GPU ?

I'm very impressed at the tigers, and prefer LW Next version, though it seems to be mostly a difference in black levels to my eye. Life of Pi version is way too orange. :D

lino.grandi
06-02-2017, 07:23 AM
I think lino stated it wasn't PBR and was ray MC render on the FB page

Using MC doesn't exclude PBR! ;)

rustythe1
06-02-2017, 07:58 AM
yea I wasn't sure after I wrote it that the statement implied that after a second look, but ohhhh the torture of not being able to try it ourselves!!!:)

Signal to Noise
06-02-2017, 08:44 AM
yes, it's due to a 'mini-bug'.
if you look closely, you can see the forehead fur in the Octane render is skewed. (marked red)

http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=136965&d=1496384634
136965

both nice renders, both can be tweaked to compensate.

When I see both renders side-by-side like this I immediately think I'm looking at a photo of a real tiger (sans pink/red markups) on the left. I definitely prefer the Octane render which looks more natural now that I see the comparison.

50one
06-02-2017, 08:49 AM
Yeah, I'm still confused which one is which.

But if the one with "deeper" eyes and some clumping/non-uniform fur is Octane, then I guess I like that one better.
But I'm sure you could tweak few things and you couldn't tell the difference.

lino.grandi
06-02-2017, 09:08 AM
When I see both renders side-by-side like this I immediately think I'm looking at a photo of a real tiger (sans pink/red markups) on the left. I definitely prefer the Octane render which looks more natural now that I see the comparison.

It may just be a different setting in FiberFX in the 2 versions. I'll check! ;)

Lito
06-02-2017, 09:13 AM
Personally I prefer the LWNext render overall, but the eyes on the Octane renderer IMHO are so much better.

prometheus
06-02-2017, 09:15 AM
I like the lightwave render best, right image.

Though both look great, but I prefer the softer more deph of field looking render, I wonder what kind of lighting difference there is, cause obviously there is, but the question is which.? that could also affect the eyes reflection and may be why some like the eyes of the octane render better.

Anyway...very nice renders, and good job.

bazsa73
06-02-2017, 10:04 AM
Octane render hurts my eye, it sizzles.

rustythe1
06-02-2017, 10:31 AM
I like the lightwave render best, right image.

Though both look great, but I prefer the softer more deph of field looking render, I wonder what kind of lighting difference there is, cause obviously there is, but the question is which.? that could also affect the eyes reflection and may be why some like the eyes of the octane render better.

Anyway...very nice renders, and good job.

he said he lit them both with the same HDRI image

wingzeta
06-02-2017, 12:12 PM
It may just be a different setting in FiberFX in the 2 versions. I'll check! ;)

A FiberFX setting difference might also indirectly affect the eyes. The Octane render having more white hairs mixed in with the black could be giving it a little more bounce into the eyes, whereas the LW tiger with deep black around the eyes may be absorbing that bounce. There is also a clear difference in the overall amount of light, or maybe exposure, most evident on the nose. Does Octane take more bounces? No two renders are exactly the same, but it would be cool to see if you can match the positive qualities of the Octane render (eye detail), even if it isn't possible to match the fine detail level exactly.

TheLexx
06-02-2017, 12:17 PM
Does anyone know which graphics card was used for Octane, and if more than one card was used ?

cove
06-02-2017, 01:08 PM
Hi Lino.
Great tiger image.
Is there an image of the whole tiger?
If so love to see it.

Boris Goreta
06-02-2017, 01:10 PM
Lino, since we're talking about FiberFX for the next release could you take a look if this has been fixed:

http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?153762-FiberFX-Swirl-doesn-t-work-with-animated-objects&p=1508221#post1508221


bug LWB-1889 reported in 2015.

rustythe1
06-02-2017, 02:18 PM
Does anyone know which graphics card was used for Octane, and if more than one card was used ?

on FB he said 2x Titan x and 2x Black so 4 hefty cards, kind of puts LWs ne renderer into perspective as the LW was 40 mins and the octane 20 mins, I would have counted having 4 expensive cards as being the equivalent of 4 I7s at least, if not then I think GPU rendering has no future as Gpus like titans are far more than cpu processors, the old Titan x in the uk is around £1200, so 4 and your looking at £4800 before you got any other hardware, you could get about 8 (10 by the time you add the hardware to power 4 cards) octa core systems pre built from scan that would render 4 (5) times as fast at those stats at that price, so where is the cost effectiveness in that????

Boris Goreta
06-02-2017, 02:30 PM
You need to have 15+ GPU cards to start working comfortably with Octane, especially when doing animations. Cost effectiveness is that once you do have 15+ GPUs you will kick ***, your projects will look waaaay better and you will be able to do more and better in much less time thus earn more money. I would have 40 GPUs if I was able to manage that much hardware but I stopped at 18. If you can render a full HD frame in under 3 minutes then you can do animation. With Octane you need that much hardware to get such times, sometimes it is as low as 30 seconds which is great.

MichaelT
06-02-2017, 04:01 PM
When I see both renders side-by-side like this I immediately think I'm looking at a photo of a real tiger (sans pink/red markups) on the left. I definitely prefer the Octane render which looks more natural now that I see the comparison.

Judging from how a white tiger actually looks, I would say the LW Next performs the best:
http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=136965&d=1496384634
136969

The whiskers on the model could even be a bit thicker, and less transparent.

TheLexx
06-02-2017, 04:09 PM
LW beats the Life of Pi tiger on the whiskers (to my eye). The Pi tiger whiskers look slightly like strands of wire, somehow separate from the rest of the image, but LW seems to nail it overall.

MichaelT
06-02-2017, 04:16 PM
??? The image I posted is actually a photo. :) (or were you responding to someone else?)

TheLexx
06-02-2017, 04:21 PM
??? The image I posted is actually a photo. :) (or were you responding to someone else?)I was comparing your images to the erikals image post. :)

MichaelT
06-02-2017, 04:23 PM
I c. I think the model misses a crucial component when it comes to fur. And that is that they are usually thicker than people think, but also that they are oily.

Boris Goreta
06-02-2017, 04:30 PM
Both renderers seem to be capable of depicting a realistic tiger, if one or the other seems better of worse it is a matter of user skill with each renderer.

MichaelT
06-02-2017, 04:40 PM
True.. but some renderers don't handle fur very well. Octane is one of them. Just as DOF in V-ray is atrociously bad (the worst in the industry) .. some tools are just better at different things.

rustythe1
06-02-2017, 05:28 PM
You need to have 15+ GPU cards to start working comfortably with Octane, especially when doing animations. Cost effectiveness is that once you do have 15+ GPUs you will kick ***, your projects will look waaaay better and you will be able to do more and better in much less time thus earn more money. I would have 40 GPUs if I was able to manage that much hardware but I stopped at 18. If you can render a full HD frame in under 3 minutes then you can do animation. With Octane you need that much hardware to get such times, sometimes it is as low as 30 seconds which is great.

but that is my point, you have 18 cards, where as I have one cpu, and yet I am producing animations with render times 1 to 2 mins using LW2015, so why would I spend over £30,000 on hardware to get frames in 30 seconds, when I could spend £1000 on a gaming PC, or better still put some cash into something like rebus farm and save a fortune on my electric bill, I still cant see how your cost effective? also I am often running very large animations that use over 32GB of ram,(I have one now, over 32gb of ram and still rendering in 2 mins) how will octane cope with that?

Boris Goreta
06-02-2017, 05:33 PM
One reason, your animations will look a whole class better. Happened to me.

erikals
06-02-2017, 06:06 PM
just comments on editing things in post.
note, this video is only shared here, not 'on' Youtube.


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

gar26lw
06-02-2017, 07:23 PM
octane is better. eyes and contrast

erikals
06-02-2017, 07:49 PM
like i explain in the video, you can tweak the LW Next Render to make it match closer to the Octane.

this is a rough PhotoShop tweak, could be improved, but should give the idea on how close you can get. Quite Close.

for a Biased render, i'd say Next delivers some very nice results.


Octane Left, Next Right

http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=136970&d=1496454545
136970

jwiede
06-02-2017, 09:31 PM
Judging from how a white tiger actually looks, I would say the LW Next performs the best:

Actually, the real photo points out even more clearly that the striping shouldn't be so "perfectly" mirrored/symmetric: The real tiger's striping is even less symmetric than the Octane version. The real tiger's nose skin also more closely resembles the Octane (w.r.t. having both high- & low-freq. details) than that of the LW Next image.

Again, I suspect this is much more about the Octane image being rendered using more layers or more detailed textures compared to what was used in rendering the LW Next image, and not about engine limits.

Also, as Greenlaw has shown multiple times, even existing FFX handled shading black and white hair quite well (with existing renderer). It was naturally-colored hair (blonde/brunette/redhead) where FFX's shading->rendering issues* became more painfully apparent. I'd still really like to see a LW Next image involving brunette hair/brown fur/etc, as that'd be (IMO) a clearer demonstration that the existing FFX hair shading issues have been solved.

*: Issue like the odd banding/moire artifacts that occur from root->tip chroma transitions across swathes of hair, and some of the oddities of translucent color transmission "fighting" with specular shine coloration, as a couple of FFX shading/rendering examples.

c.1
06-02-2017, 09:53 PM
I am going to just point out the obvious, but with just a tiny "sniff" of a LWNext's features and the LW community is all over it (5 pages comments)..........this is a pent up marketing opportunity waiting to to be realized and released unto the world........just sayin'

Now back to your original programming.

djwaterman
06-02-2017, 10:59 PM
Erikals, did you just copy and paste the eyes and nose onto the LW render? I'm not sure that proves anything. Anyway, the Octane render is pretty crunchy with noisy artifacts and the fur looks unintentionally dirty, the LW one looks like a photo out of National Geographic, as for the eyes, if you think they need more detail you could just play with the refraction values, but having looked at a bunch of tiger images that this was based on, tiger eyes can look more milky like the LW render and less like glass eyes. The LW render is cleaner with better tonal values overall, so it will be easier to treat in post, I'm not sure you could do much with the Octane render to fix it. Octane's render has also picked up more blue cast from the HDR and that's something you'd probably not want. This is all down to taste anyway, I'm sure you could drive up the sampling quality on the Octane render and fix some of this stuff but as it stands with the two examples, LW native is the better result here from my point of view.

erikals
06-02-2017, 11:13 PM
did you just copy and paste the eyes and nose onto the LW render?
I'm not sure that proves anything.

not quite, but like i explained it's fairly easy to match the look. like explained in the video.
i just don't have time to make a Octane vs LightWave render.

it's not going to be a match, but very close. and yep, it's a cheat, it can be compared to the gradient cheats Gerardo did back in the days.

adk
06-03-2017, 12:41 AM
... my attempt at matching LW Next and Octane. Think I got pretty close :D
FYI - model provided by my daughter

erikals
06-03-2017, 01:01 AM
... my attempt at matching LW Next and Octane. Think I got pretty close :D
FYI - model provided by my daughter

we have a Winner! :)

LoL, cute! :) :D

http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=136974&d=1496473269

136974

adk
06-03-2017, 01:12 AM
I tried my darndest to match the life in the eyes, the nose and the asymmetrical fur pattern. Wasn't easy so I'm glad you appreciate the effort erikals.
Now to add some whiskers and decent SSS

erikals
06-03-2017, 01:40 AM
yes, i was about to comment the missing whiskers. :)

i'd love to add one too, but all i have lying around is a Lion... http://mygrafico.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/cropped-lion-fav512x-32x32.png

MichaelT
06-03-2017, 02:15 AM
Actually, the real photo points out even more clearly that the striping shouldn't be so "perfectly" mirrored/symmetric: The real tiger's striping is even less symmetric than the Octane version. The real tiger's nose skin also more closely resembles the Octane (w.r.t. having both high- & low-freq. details) than that of the LW Next image.

Again, I suspect this is much more about the Octane image being rendered using more layers or more detailed textures compared to what was used in rendering the LW Next image, and not about engine limits.

Also, as Greenlaw has shown multiple times, even existing FFX handled shading black and white hair quite well (with existing renderer). It was naturally-colored hair (blonde/brunette/redhead) where FFX's shading->rendering issues* became more painfully apparent. I'd still really like to see a LW Next image involving brunette hair/brown fur/etc, as that'd be (IMO) a clearer demonstration that the existing FFX hair shading issues have been solved.

*: Issue like the odd banding/moire artifacts that occur from root->tip chroma transitions across swathes of hair, and some of the oddities of translucent color transmission "fighting" with specular shine coloration, as a couple of FFX shading/rendering examples.

I think the Octane looks very desaturated. Like there is no life in it. Conversely the LW Next version looks oversaturated. But it would be hard to say exactly what those differences come from, since we don't have the project files to look at. The difference in the striping isn't there, it just looks that way because the code in Octane that works on collecting the samples, incorrectly "thinks" that those white patches is the expected final result. If octane had been truly unbiased (which it isn't) it would take a very long time to reach a stable image. Being as fast as it is, also means it needs to take shortcuts. The result of one of those is the incorrect result in the fur we are looking at. I don't have Maxwell, but I have a strong suspicion that would fare significantly better than Octane.

prometheus
06-03-2017, 07:23 AM
my render :)


not actually, but one of my sisters cats, maya..norwegian forrest cat..always bites me in the nose when greeting me, if not a polllution of the thread, it may serve as reference :)
if lightwave and the new fiberfx system works great..which these tiger renders surely indicate, I want all lightwave cat lovers to produce cat renders by the mass.


https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/I4EtZOvmdEF4UEfNM4l6HgSh_IcQhTuUekshg_kQXprtvdgaWy Y2UAPhHbgTOy98enKc_HeY4d2D=w293-h220

Large image...
https://get.google.com/albumarchive/100944643113557837045/album/AF1QipND3RYAYKRTBqWdZmhjh3hJwrSRlVHU6Iu6CmzV/AF1QipMOlszICaz6qqaC68SZP8vFFWDo-DkOnvQRTE76

erikals
06-03-2017, 07:48 AM
that's actually a great reference :)

cute cat :)

50one
06-03-2017, 09:27 AM
It's funny to see an actual thread with meaningful info on LW next being derailed by the same people who always complain about people who complain about lack of info/comms.http://meganandtimmy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/train-derail.jpg

prometheus
06-03-2017, 10:54 AM
It's funny to see an actual thread with meaningful info on LW next being derailed by the same people who always complain about people who complain about lack of info/comms.http://meganandtimmy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/train-derail.jpg

?? what on earth are you talking about, and what has this to do wih fur or fiberfx renders?

jwiede
06-03-2017, 01:03 PM
It's funny to see an actual thread with meaningful info on LW next being derailed by the same people who always complain about people who complain about lack of info/comms.
Interesting point, good catch!

m.d.
06-03-2017, 06:05 PM
I think the Octane looks very desaturated. Like there is no life in it. Conversely the LW Next version looks oversaturated. But it would be hard to say exactly what those differences come from, since we don't have the project files to look at. The difference in the striping isn't there, it just looks that way because the code in Octane that works on collecting the samples, incorrectly "thinks" that those white patches is the expected final result. If octane had been truly unbiased (which it isn't) it would take a very long time to reach a stable image. Being as fast as it is, also means it needs to take shortcuts. The result of one of those is the incorrect result in the fur we are looking at. I don't have Maxwell, but I have a strong suspicion that would fare significantly better than Octane.

Way overthinking this.....

Octane comes out as a linear render. You then apply a combination of dozens of camera profiles and gamma curves to tone map the image. Nothing really to do with the code so much....just artistic license. Octane could just as easily pump out a heavily oversaturated image if the artist so desired.

How exactly is octane not unbiased?

erikals
06-03-2017, 10:29 PM
How exactly is octane not unbiased?
as far as i recall, no render engine is truly unbiased, it's a matter of definition. seems most agree that Octane is heavily unbiased though.

MichaelT
06-04-2017, 02:39 AM
Because it makes assumptions on the outcome of any rendered region, a must if you want speed. But.... as soon as you begin making assumptions, that is also the point where you stop being unbiased. I don't think there is any truly unbiased engine out there at all. They may state they are.. but in reality no. They all make assumptions to some degree. And no.. unbiased doesn't mean physically accurate either. As far as Octane go.. it is a great engine.. but it isn't a silver bullet. There are problems with it. And it's poor ability to properly deal with things like fur is one of them. But I willingly admit that you can make the fur look good in it. But like any other engine that works worse in an area.. more work is required to make it look good.

And by the way... desaturated.. was for the tiger image only. I don't say Octane images in general are desaturated. I do use Octane myself after all :)

erikals
06-04-2017, 03:14 AM
And it's poor ability to properly deal with things like fur is one of them.
i'm not so sure, seems to me to to >also< be much about people not having tested it enough.

i'm just not sure How good a Octane Hair render can get.
https://render.otoy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=56140

Octane seems to render short hair/fur slightly better than longer hair.

another example >

https://render.otoy.com/forum/download/file.php?id=55408&mode=view

MichaelT
06-04-2017, 04:09 AM
Things get more apparent when the hair is short, especially if it have to deal with a root that is colored differently. Octane have a tendency to converge on one or the other dominating frequencies. Where as Maxwell for instance, is much better on converging on an average between the two. Making the fur really stand out in a good way.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCgp_xOzu0M

Markc
06-04-2017, 04:16 AM
It seems this thread has turned into an Octane vs LW competition.

From my humble perspective LW Next's renderer (and Fibre FX) looks fantastic :D

erikals
06-04-2017, 04:38 AM
From my humble perspective LW Next's renderer (and Fibre FX) looks fantastic
we all agree to that i think,
just some of us discussing pros/cons/features of Octane/Next at the moment.

i'd love to discuss Next more, if i could just get my hands on it. :)

i'm pretty much done though, not more i can add to this discussion. Lookin' forward to Next. :)

MichaelT
06-04-2017, 05:38 AM
@MarkC: "It seems this thread has turned into an Octane vs LW competition."

Nah.. it is more about fur really. Hair is very difficult to get right. It is right up there with proper eyes, skin and realistic facial micro movements.

Yes, Next is what most of us are looking forward to (I hope :) )

gamedesign1
06-04-2017, 06:12 AM
Both renderers seem to be capable of depicting a realistic tiger, if one or the other seems better of worse it is a matter of user skill with each renderer.

I agree, both renderers are showing to be more than capable. And I bet you could get the LW Render to look like the Octane Render if you played with a few settings and vise versa.

m.d.
06-04-2017, 09:26 AM
Because it makes assumptions on the outcome of any rendered region, a must if you want speed. But.... as soon as you begin making assumptions, that is also the point where you stop being unbiased. I don't think there is any truly unbiased engine out there at all. They may state they are.. but in reality no. They all make assumptions to some degree. And no.. unbiased doesn't mean physically accurate either. As far as Octane go.. it is a great engine.. but it isn't a silver bullet. There are problems with it. And it's poor ability to properly deal with things like fur is one of them. But I willingly admit that you can make the fur look good in it. But like any other engine that works worse in an area.. more work is required to make it look good.

And by the way... desaturated.. was for the tiger image only. I don't say Octane images in general are desaturated. I do use Octane myself after all :)

Got it.

I disagree about no renders being unbiased though, as the definition basically means zero interpolation, and that given enough time it will resolve the render to a mathematically correct result based on the parameters it functions within.
It does not mean physically accurate as you stated....just non interpolated.
It will have a floating point precision cutoff, it will have a ray epsilon cutoff, it will have errors on its voxelization of fine geometry etc etc
Just as long as it will reach a mathematically unbiased result over an infinite amount of time, within the comfines of its precision cut offs and clamping limits.

With a filter size of 1, and max rejects reduced to zero, and caustic blur at zero....octane is running completely unbiased within the confines of its precision.
Once again....not physically accurate, just non interpolated.

MichaelT
06-04-2017, 11:12 AM
It is a bit more complicated than that.. The renderers out there do more adjustments than simply interpolating. Octane especially so. But I won't go into long technical debates about it.. not here anyway. Also, I think one company (that makes one of the renderers) released some statements regarding this very point some time ago. Can't remember which one.. but I'm certain Google can find it.

THIBAULT
06-04-2017, 11:27 AM
It seems this thread has turned into an Octane vs LW competition.

From my humble perspective LW Next's renderer (and Fibre FX) looks fantastic :D

Yes, for me too !

bazsa73
06-04-2017, 11:45 AM
Physical correctness at the best is just an approximation. So far the LWnext render looks way more pleasing than the sizzling octane one. The latter is simply non-aesthetic, harsh and ugly even if it's
correct physically. Aesthetic aspects exists beyond physical approximations.

erikals
06-04-2017, 11:58 AM
disagree. both are good. both have pros/cons. imo.

MAUROCOR
06-04-2017, 12:14 PM
disagree. both are good. both have pros/cons. imo.


Shhhh!!! You told you were done with that discussion, do you remember? ;)

"i'm pretty much done though, not more i can add to this discussion. Lookin' forward to Next. "

erikals
06-04-2017, 12:27 PM
true. :) thanks for borrowing Lino the file. :)

MichaelT
06-04-2017, 12:29 PM
:) Yes, nice work on the tiger head btw Maurocor.

TreyX
06-04-2017, 02:05 PM
elegant and beautiful. :)

kolby
06-05-2017, 07:38 AM
Guys, check the facebook page. There is new post from Lino.

erikals
06-05-2017, 07:55 AM
have the link?
ah, the LightWave facebook... https://www.facebook.com/LightWave3D

Snosrap
06-05-2017, 08:07 AM
have the link?
ah, the LightWave facebook... https://www.facebook.com/LightWave3D

Haven't we pretty much seen this before? Like two years ago. :) But yes, it's nice to see more and more stuff leak out. Maybe we will see a release in 2017 after all. My money is during Siggraph which starts at the end of July. Sure NT won't be there but it's a good time to announce and deliver new product.

kolby
06-05-2017, 08:16 AM
It's possible to rip out this video from that f.....g facebook ? I do not have an account there.

rustythe1
06-05-2017, 08:27 AM
they are not on the floor plan and I would expect they would be cautious about booking in case Next had major problems just before release as it would seem to feel like they have had some being as we keep getting hints it was just around the corner but there always seems to be another corner just around that one, think we are stuck in a spiral maze of corners

art
06-05-2017, 08:34 AM
It's possible to rip out this video from that f.....g facebook ? I do not have an account there.

I think it's possible to view it without an account. I just tried it while being logged out, clicked "not now" when prompted to create an account and I could see it.

kolby
06-05-2017, 08:37 AM
I think it's possible to view it without an account. I just tried it while being logged out, clicked "not now" when prompted to create an account and I could see it.

Hm, doesn't work here.

Mastoy
06-05-2017, 09:03 AM
Here is a quick download link : https://we.tl/Byat2Rdt52
It will last only one week

prometheus
06-05-2017, 09:11 AM
Hm, doesn't work here.

Try this, it will play on my experimental site..without the need to login, or ant distracting join facebook now messages, I noticed that on full screen it ends to early, might be a glitch, but try watching it as it is without full screen, I may be able to rescale it up a bit more...
http://michaeli65.wixsite.com/prometheus/videos

I must add..If Lino or someone objects against me putting it there, just let me know and I will take it down.

50one
06-05-2017, 09:32 AM
Update under mouse? Nice.
buckets? Even nicer.

kolby
06-05-2017, 09:41 AM
Thanks guys for the video !

lardbros
06-05-2017, 10:49 AM
Beautiful renders from Lino, and that SSS on Godzilla? looks gorgeous! It'll be so nice to have lights actually reflected by surfaces without having to mess around with bounce cards... looks lush!

MichaelT
06-05-2017, 10:53 AM
I for one am just happy that there are more posts coming. Since this is mostly what I am concerned about.. that the product is moving forward. But I also hope they're not stuck in development hell, because those are tricky to get out of.

THIBAULT
06-05-2017, 11:29 AM
Don't understand very good ! It's Octane IPR ! Nothing about LWNext !

MichaelT
06-05-2017, 11:43 AM
No.. one is LWNext, the other is Octane. They both use the same scene.

Scazzino
06-05-2017, 11:47 AM
Looks great! Looking forward to the next release!

MichaelT
06-05-2017, 11:47 AM
Here are some comparisons between the two:

Octane:
136986


LWNext:
136987


Octane is using some effects the LWNext version isn't. Like DOF etc.. And the LWNext version is using the function where you can use your mouse to focus attention on details (the crosshair)
But they are also not really meant to be compared like this, since the scenes aren't set up for that.

wingzeta
06-05-2017, 12:33 PM
Looks great. The pull down tab next to VPR that says Final Render, makes me think either there is some sort of background bucket render, or a new location for the f9 image viewer, so it doesn't float on top. Anyone know more about that?

gamedesign1
06-05-2017, 12:42 PM
Looks great. The pull down tab next to VPR that says Final Render, makes me think either there is some sort of background bucket render, or a new location for the f9 image viewer, so it doesn't float on top. Anyone know more about that?

Thats the buffer dropdown I think.

wingzeta
06-05-2017, 12:57 PM
Thats the buffer dropdown I think.

Oh yeah, that makes sense.

Matt
06-05-2017, 01:14 PM
Looks great. The pull down tab next to VPR that says Final Render, makes me think either there is some sort of background bucket render, or a new location for the f9 image viewer, so it doesn't float on top. Anyone know more about that?

https://blog.lightwave3d.com/2016/01/render-buffers/

wingzeta
06-05-2017, 01:58 PM
https://blog.lightwave3d.com/2016/01/render-buffers/

I forgot about that one, until gamedesign1 mentioned it. Should be very handy.

palmka
06-05-2017, 02:26 PM
Cool picture, I really like it!

adk
06-05-2017, 05:54 PM
After playing around with arnold , redshift , mantra I'm really looking forward to playing with this new LW render engine. I know the logic of "why a new render engine" has been raised a few times, for me it's a most welcome inclusion and couldn't come quick enough. Speed looks pretty decent too compared to 4 GPU's. Nice work LW3DG !

jwiede
06-05-2017, 08:06 PM
Speed looks pretty decent too compared to 4 GPU's.

I suggest caution regarding speculation of relative performance.

Without ability to objectively assess the scenes and content used for each render, there's no way to really determine how well-tuned each scene was for its respective renderer -- for all we know it was a painfully inefficient setup for Octane due to unintentional misconfig or issues versus an ideal scene and configuration for LW Next render (or vice versa -- that's the point, there's just not enough info).

The visual quality of the LW Next output appears nicely acceptable, and the contextual performance sounds promising, but that's about the limit of what can be rationally derived from the extremely limited info currently available.

adk
06-05-2017, 09:30 PM
I suggest caution regarding speculation of relative performance.

Without ability to objectively assess the scenes and content used for each render, there's no way to really determine how well-tuned each scene was for its respective renderer -- for all we know it was a painfully inefficient setup for Octane due to unintentional misconfig or issues versus an ideal scene and configuration for LW Next render (or vice versa -- that's the point, there's just not enough info).

The visual quality of the LW Next output appears nicely acceptable, and the contextual performance sounds promising, but that's about the limit of what can be rationally derived from the extremely limited info currently available.

Point taken jwiede. There are certainly things one can do to speed up or hamper octane from my experience, and I'm sure the same holds true for the new engine. I wasn't exactly making an A vs B comparison, just saying that the speed appears to be in the ballpark so to speak. I'm sure Lino's rig ain't too shabby on the CPU side of things either and Octane is also resolving DOF which isn't much of a hit for it and might be for LW ?
Anyway, having both as options certainly won't hurt.

Nicolas Jordan
06-05-2017, 10:30 PM
I personally prefer the look of the fur and the eyes in the Octane render but the Lightwave NEXT one looks good too, just a bit different I guess.

gar26lw
06-06-2017, 02:24 AM
@ MAtt : it would be great if VPR was its own toggle button and you could select the render buffers from a separate buffer drop down, so there is not so much navigation down a drop down tree structure iike in the video on the blog. UX is not so hot, imho.

please could you consider this :)


136993

rustythe1
06-06-2017, 02:54 AM
@ MAtt : it would be great if VPR was its own toggle button and you could select the render buffers from a separate buffer drop down, so there is not so much navigation down a drop down tree structure iike in the video on the blog. UX is not so hot, imho.

please could you consider this :)


136993

do you mean like it shows on the previous page? looks like they have individual drop downs now built into the viewport rather than a separate render window?
136994

gar26lw
06-06-2017, 05:29 AM
yeah that might be it. sorry, i missed the post on the previous page.

sadkkf
06-06-2017, 09:50 AM
It's looking like I might seriously benefit from an Nvidia card ... or two, or three.... And right after I buy an AMD. Is this right? Is Next going to utilize the GPU more in rendering or just in VPR?

Snosrap
06-06-2017, 10:45 AM
Is Next going to utilize the GPU more in rendering or just in VPR? Neither. All native LW rendering will continue to be CPU based.

sadkkf
06-06-2017, 12:56 PM
Neither. All native LW rendering will continue to be CPU based.

Thanks. I think I'm actually relieved to hear that.