PDA

View Full Version : Does the New Lightwave Rendering Engine have changes to Colour Depth?



dualboot
05-31-2006, 06:26 PM
I can't seem to dismiss the feeling I have when looking at LW9's renderings posted here. Compared to old LW6-8 images look somehow flat. This may be purely subjective feeling but I doubt it.

Did the introduction of new ray trace core do some damage to colour output of Lightwave's rendering engine, or this has happened because of nodal shaders? Any thoughts on this?

ShawnStovall
05-31-2006, 06:35 PM
I don't see any difference between quality(of course, I'm only 13.):D

Emfrobia
05-31-2006, 06:47 PM
Haha, I'm only 13 too!:D I don't notice a difference either though. Do you have the same computer moniter?

jcaesar
05-31-2006, 06:52 PM
I haven't really noticed any difference in color depth in some other people's example renders, though I think part of it may actually be people testing the new shader models (e.g. for diffuse/spec).

I could be wrong of course, but then again, I'm working on a giant spaceship which looks the same in color as it does in gray scale :)
J

T-Light
05-31-2006, 07:56 PM
Are you asking technically or aesthetically? The answer either way is neither :)

As jcaesar says, It's probably down to various shaders being tested, there's also the possibility that finished 3D images are both polished renders and have some 'post' applied, the ones here are raw demo's people are experimenting with.

LAV
06-01-2006, 03:11 AM
Compared to old LW6-8 images look somehow flat. This may be purely subjective feeling but I doubt it.

I disagree. :)

Chuck
06-01-2006, 10:09 AM
Rendering 8.x and prior scenes in both the old and the new renderers will demonstrate that the look of the renderer, including color depth, is virtually unchanged.

CoryC
06-01-2006, 11:54 AM
Chuck, now that you mention that, I did a 8.5 render and a 9 render of my stagecoach and they are identical. I think Kurtis posted the split screen image in the gallery section.

Matt
06-01-2006, 12:26 PM
There you go, from the horses mouth!

:)

dualboot
06-01-2006, 12:42 PM
Thanks, I could not tested it myself as i do not have Lw9...well yet. ^^

Lightwolf
06-01-2006, 02:11 PM
There you go, from the horses mouth!

I can just picture Chuck as a horse.... not ;)

Cheers,
Mike - hm, maybe a LW cow? :D

Edit: And please don't get me wrong here ;)

Silkrooster
06-01-2006, 05:33 PM
I can just picture Chuck as a horse.... not ;)

Cheers,
Mike - hm, maybe a LW cow? :D

Edit: And please don't get me wrong here ;)
Hmmm... Maybe a Chuck Wagon.LOL.:jester:
I know, thats bad.:D
Silk

byte_fx
06-05-2006, 04:38 PM
Rendering 8.x and prior scenes in both the old and the new renderers will demonstrate that the look of the renderer, including color depth, is virtually unchanged.

Taking that a step further -

Try rendering rendering a scene frame that is heavily shadow mapped with a wide range of subtle color changes.

Use single pass and render an ultra hi-res image so there's less smoothing and blending of pixels.

Load both into any image editor that can count total number of colors used.

That should help answer the question.

To date some, but not all, render speed improvements have resulted in less color depth.

To the point that I sometimes render on an old P2 system running v 4.0 with some fresnel shaders I wrote. They don't have an interface and have to be compiled with whatever settings are needed but they still work very well.

But I'm seriously looking into using LW for modeling and scene set-up only and Rendernan or Maya for rendering.

byte_fx

Captain Obvious
06-05-2006, 05:21 PM
But I'm seriously looking into using LW for modeling and scene set-up only and Rendernan or Maya for rendering.
That sounds horribly backwards. With the rendering improvements to LW9, it's one of the better renderers out there. What actual improvements would Prman offer you, besides putting a nice dent in your wallet?

jameswillmott
06-05-2006, 05:48 PM
Taking that a step further -

Try rendering rendering a scene frame that is heavily shadow mapped with a wide range of subtle color changes.

Use single pass and render an ultra hi-res image so there's less smoothing and blending of pixels.

Load both into any image editor that can count total number of colors used.

That should help answer the question.

I think loading a render into an image editor and counting colours isn't the best way of determining whether saturation has been lost. LW works internally in floating point colour, I don't see how saturation specifically can be affected, you're saying the colours are coming out 'greyer' than they used to? Can you post examples?

Dave Jerrard
06-05-2006, 06:10 PM
Image file format issue maybe? I haven't seen any loss of saturation or color depth in any renders here, and I have excellent color perception. This makes me wonder if it's something in a file format that's getting messed up with color management somewhere else.


He Who Can See All The Patterns In Color Blindness Tests.

byte_fx
06-05-2006, 07:30 PM
Suppose it could be changes made in image savers.

Part of the problem may also be that 9 introduces a lot of features that haven't been close to be being fully utilized at this point.

Thought the problem might be my 'net crt so I checked out the v9 renderings on three different production monitors that are calibrated using spyder2.

No change - all the images posted so far seem dull and lifeless. As though they have no depth.

Another factor that is quite possibly affecting the renders is the increasing trend for quantity over quality.

Production deadlines are growing shorter as competition for survival increases.

So shorter render times - and the resultant loss of render quality - have taken precedence over render quality. More often in the hands of the users than the software.

I'll wait to see how good v9 can render when render time isn't a concern but quality is.

In the meantime I'll probably continue having a friend do my renders in Maya.

byte_fx

Celshader
06-05-2006, 07:38 PM
I'll wait to see how good v9 can render when render time isn't a concern but quality is.

You don't have to wait -- Brederock did these cool LightWave9 renders where he placed quality above render time concerns:
http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51832

wacom
06-05-2006, 09:05 PM
Has a good LW artist ever had a hard time getting good images out of it? I thought render times were the main issue? Glad it's much faster now and getting faster by the day. Nodes help too.

PRman? Why not go with 3Delight? It's free for single users and many people say it and Air are much better, more flexable, have a larger feature set, and are vastly cheaper. Way out of my understanding zone though at any rate!

Captain Obvious
06-05-2006, 10:20 PM
Has a good LW artist ever had a hard time getting good images out of it? I thought render times were the main issue? Glad it's much faster now and getting faster by the day. Nodes help too.
Exactly. Lightwave's renderer has always looked stunning. Its main issue has been speed. LW9 seems to go great lengths for fixing that.

byte_fx
06-06-2006, 01:11 AM
The render by Brederock is probably the best I've seen posted - haven't looked lately.

Not the sort of stuff I do but it could fit into what I do.

I'm more into virtual world stuff. Like you see if you look out a window - no matter where the window might be. London. Paris, Omaha - or some unknow planet.

Don't get me wrong - I'm still a fan of LW. And LW has always impressed me; from 3.5 onward. Both modeling and rendering.

If that wasn't the case I wouldn't be going into this.

And I agree that, in essence, LW is merely tool. Albeit a good tool.

It's up to the users to get what they can out of it.

Far as external renderers go Air is out - I've sold all my reasonably fast PC stuff and switched to Mac. Fed up with Micrsoft's silliness. Getting a message that I was using an illegal copy when I tried to active the fourth license of a Server 2003 five pack was the last straw.

Looking into 3Delight; so far it's looking promising. Main problem will be file export in RIB. Preferably in OS X. Also looking into that. There's a PC freebie that might work well enough. But I'd have maintain a copy of LW on a PC.

And maybe Polytrans - although I don't know anyone that uses it for that purpose.

I'll be checking out v9 when the demo disk comes out - just hope the use period is long enough to really learn how to get the best out of it.

byte_fx

dualboot
06-07-2006, 01:30 AM
So I guess I'm not the only one with this observation, even images Bedrock made have somewhat "colourdull" appearance.

I guess if image savers are in question it's a relief, since they are probably easier to fix.

Chuck
06-07-2006, 12:31 PM
Again, there are no changes to the renderer that reduce color depth capability, and the fact is that the same scene rendered in the old and the new renderers produces identical results. In addition, so far as I am aware the majority of the image savers are in fact unchanged, other than to address some bugs in the tif loader.

Anything that you've seen from the old renderer that you liked can be done in the new renderer just as easily and the same way as before. If you don't like the images you've seen so far, it isn't due to any reduction in the color depth capability of the renderer, because there isn't one. Nor in fact is there any particular change in the range of looks that can be achieved, other than the massive extension of that range via the addition of node-based shading models.