Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 91 to 97 of 97

Thread: I want to render like Maxwell Render

  1. #91
    Profesor Pixel Poo Mr Rid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,799
    Quote Originally Posted by GraphXs View Post
    Mr Rid, great information and wonderful example. How do you achive the soft shadows, did ya use a bunch of Area lights? Spots/Shadow mapping? I do agree that using GI just seems to add more time to rendering, and yes it is faster now but does require alot of tweaking to get it right. The image you posted was wonderful, any chance of ever breaking down how you achieve that quality?

    When you use a sphere with a world/plate image maps on to them do you use background GI or just diffuse/ref/spec passes?

    Is that sphere 100% self-illuminated?

    What types of lights do you use for non-GI solutions? Distant? Area? Spot?

    Thanks!
    I mostly use areas, Q- 3. Most scenes can be lit with 2 or 3 lights at most. For the LXG shots, I used spinny light rigs that saved considerable time in 7.5, while mimicking an area light.

    The GI sphere or other geometry is usually 100% lum. I may use diffuse values instead when a CG subject is close to a GI mesh and should cast a shadow on that particular area, so the radiosity bounce is appropriately darkened. Like for instance where a CG tree intersects with the ground in a plate. I may increase the lum value for other effects like recreating a bounce card from set.

    In LW 7.5 most people had tried radiosity and went, 'Aah, takes too long!' But I recall that I had to put a CG creature in the middle of a plate of a hallway. So I loaded a card and positioned it for the floor of the hallway, then I kept cloning and positioning the card in place of the walls, furniture, etc. I discovered that if I front projection mapped the plate onto these cards the radiosity lighting integrated the CG perfectly with the right temperature and falloff and all that, and the radiosity traced very fast since the luminous environment does not receive a bounce and only casts light on the subject.

    I may use shadow maps with a high map size (5k) but only for low intensity fill or rim lights where there is low detail on the meshes or they are not seen too closeup. Shadow maps are not accurate enough for fine detail or realistic shadows.

    A big mistake I see often is people using fill lights with no shadows on. I dont know what they are thinking. Nothing in reality casts light without a corresponding shadow. Another goofy thing is when someone bakes an occlusion pass into geomety and also renders it with radiosity. Or they combine occlusion and radiosity passes in the comp. This will only double up the occlusion unrealistically.
    Last edited by Mr Rid; 06-16-2009 at 10:03 PM.
    "O K, so what's the speed of dark?"

    Demo reel 2017
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOOixvRhcs4

  2. #92
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Rid View Post
    Oh no. Here I was trying to de-complicate. Dont do it Toby!
    Don't worry I'm very pragmatic about doing extra work ( read -> lazy as hell ) if it doesn't show a definite improvement in the image I won't go to any more trouble. And there's no compatibility issues at my home. But mostly I want to know how to do it and what to expect.
    Confirmed -
    No Weapons of Mass Destruction
    or links to Al Queda or 9/11. (Sep. 2003)

  3. #93
    Quote Originally Posted by toby View Post
    I will try to test that out this week!
    And it's really only 2 steps if you're compositing anyway, right?
    Yes. It's only two steps if we save our output images in some floating point format.


    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Rid
    Oh no. Here I was trying to de-complicate. Dont do it Toby!

    Ironing out the color space conundrum ( http://www.theasc.com/magazine/jan05...rum/page1.html AC article) between all the different 3D and 2D apps, on different platforms, on different monitors, with different LUTS, and between different facilities is far, far from simple. This topic always goes on indefinitely. I went around and around this color space mess in LW (using the CCfilter) for months with many informed heads and finally scrapped it for a much simpler pipeline that works perfectly fine.
    It seems you are confusing linear workflow with color management... again



    Gerardo

  4. #94
    Profesor Pixel Poo Mr Rid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,799
    Quote Originally Posted by gerardstrada View Post
    It seems you are confusing linear workflow with color management... again

    Gerardo
    I refuse this topic. It will just wind up going on and on. I found it is hard enough to discuss in person but just impossible in text. But you might want to put a link to that other color space thread here.
    Last edited by Mr Rid; 06-16-2009 at 10:10 PM.
    "O K, so what's the speed of dark?"

    Demo reel 2017
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOOixvRhcs4

  5. #95
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Rid View Post
    that other color space thread
    bam!
    http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?p=809998#
    Confirmed -
    No Weapons of Mass Destruction
    or links to Al Queda or 9/11. (Sep. 2003)

  6. #96
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Rid View Post
    I refuse this topic. It will just wind up going on and on. I found it is hard enough to discuss in person but just impossible in text. But you might want to put a link to that other color space thread here.
    In fact, it's better to put it in black and white (text). But if the way you have found works in the final result, that's what matters. Maybe you haven't noticed yet but the instinctive way you have found (eyeballing) might have a logic and a scientific background after all, like it seems has happened with your technique for Spatial IBL. I can ensure this by my own experience too. This also had happened to many people with the linear workflow and some other workflows, methods and techniques. At first, people did tend to choose desaturated colors by increasing ambient lighting and tweaking their shaders to compensate the lack of gamma correction. Later, they began to gamma correct the output and adjusting roughly the appropriate colors by sight (this is well-known as the perceptual method). Nowadays we have tools that calculate accurate values for us automatically, and we know that realistic results are easier with a linear workflow applied to the whole pipeline - this is pretty easy for most of people at gamma level. My guess is that, at some point, the same thing is gonna happen with linear workflows at gamut level and color management for CG work.

    --- o ---

    Don't want to get off-topic but for people interested: a basic linear workflow at gamma level is pretty simple (the 2-3 steps I mentioned before), things begin to get complicated when we need more accuracy and we jump to gamut level (at least 7 steps), since this implies to take into account the color flow - color management (CM) and many people get lost here. And people tend to get lost there because color flow is in dependence of the image devices and systems we use in production. seeing that in every project something changes, every project needs a different scheme for color management. This happens just because we have used a different photo camera, or a different digital camera, or a different video camera, or a different film stock, or a different print, or a different scanner, or a different laboratory, or a different projector, or a different platform, or a different DI system, or a different output medium, etc. However, the principle is the same for any of them.

    At this point, SG_CCTools are designed to manage this color flow within Lightwave. There's no other 3D package at this moment that offers this kind of facilities at gamut level. And these are free tools. However its features at gamut level are designed for people whom understand these principles and know what they are doing.

    In this context, to simplify things for studio environments, it could be a general CM window that manages CC modules and automates the setup (better if convertions are hidden for CG artists) and a person (a DT or Supervisor) who design the color flow for these modules so that the CG artist just fill them with the indicated data, and it be applied globally. I think the incoming support for EXIF metadata and the already announced Python compatibility, could help a lot for this purpose.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Rid View Post
    Or they combine occlusion and radiosity passes in the comp. This will only double up the occlusion unrealistically
    Yes, the only way that I've found to do this correctly is by separating the color bleed pass from the RO pass in post, or with the so useful DP_Filter Node Editors, and mixing it with a new RO pass (from an IBL rig) or an AO pass.



    Gerardo

  7. #97
    normally i am different ingo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Close to the baltic sea, nearly in it
    Posts
    1,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Rid View Post
    .....Another goofy thing is when someone bakes an occlusion pass into geomety and also renders it with radiosity. Or they combine occlusion and radiosity passes in the comp. This will only double up the occlusion unrealistically.
    Well normally you should use the occlusion pass as an alpha channel to paint dirt in that areas, means not only darken but also color variations or textures.

    Good ol' days of slow raydiosity, i have found an old tutorial about Cameramapping an ambient occlusion pass on my website, just 6 years old (is that old school now ?) http://im-graphics.com/ptuto/p/tuto-e.html
    ingo erik moltzen - virtual image maker --- www.im-graphics.com

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •