1. Thank for linking to the RH video, I've just discovered that the lights have values measured in Lumens, thanks I guess, although it's not super intuitive. This from the manual.

{Loading a scene from a previous version of LightWave will automatically convert scene lights to the correct values, but if you need to manually convert a 100 % light from the old percentage scale to Lux you can do so according to the following rules:

Area * 3.14
Distant * 3.14
Dome * 1.57 (converted to Distant light with the appropriate angle)
Linear * 3.14
NGon * 3.14
Photometric no changes, but see note
Point * 3.14
Spherical * 6.28
Spotlight * 3.14
3rd party lights * 3.14}

So 100% is 3.14. I'm not very mathematically oriented so that's gonna be odd for me, what would 50% percent be? Anyway, they broke the egg to make an omelet.

2. Originally Posted by djwaterman
Thank for linking to the RH video, I've just discovered that the lights have values measured in Lumens, thanks I guess, although it's not super intuitive. This from the manual.

{Loading a scene from a previous version of LightWave will automatically convert scene lights to the correct values, but if you need to manually convert a 100 % light from the old percentage scale to Lux you can do so according to the following rules:

Area * 3.14
Distant * 3.14
Dome * 1.57 (converted to Distant light with the appropriate angle)
Linear * 3.14
NGon * 3.14
Photometric no changes, but see note
Point * 3.14
Spherical * 6.28
Spotlight * 3.14
3rd party lights * 3.14}

So 100% is 3.14. I'm not very mathematically oriented so that's gonna be odd for me, what would 50% percent be? Anyway, they broke the egg to make an omelet.

3. Originally Posted by THIBAULT
Yes, same here ! Happy with the result but afraid with rendertimes ! Not sure we use it in architectural production ! And sure we don't use it with interior rendering, so long ! Waiting for Octane denoising !
totally agree. I was hoping after years of octane rendering i may return native rendering.. But no . oh no no no .. .. it is so slow ... so noisy ... Once denoiser released for Octane .. we are saved completely.

4. -Yep and Kray 3 for LW2018.
Yep, Kray3 is just around the corner....since 2014 at least.

5. Well yeah, there are other faster renderers, but let's keep the focus on how to use this one. I've been experimenting with the environment light, which is an image based lighting source, it will give you shadows calculated on the environment light source, which we never really had before. The only weird thing is, all my HDR images that work fine elsewhere over-blow the kurcheezus out of my renders, the only ones that don't exhibit this are the one I find in the 2018 content folder, which are EXR files, I don't really see the difference between my other HDRs and the LW EXR files, at least to look at, all my settings remain the same but the difference in renders is that I can't get anything acceptable with the HDR's. What's the special secret with the ones in the content folder, provided by Illuminated Tools.

Edit, there is the following in the help, may account for the blow-out, although doesn't account for the fact the Illuminated Tools EXRs don't blow out the scene.

In Use
The Environment light affects the Diffuse and Specular environment of your scene. There are some rules to follow to get the best from it without blowing out renders.

If the Environment light contributes to the background radiosity by using the Affect Diffuse setting in the Light Properties panel, then uncheck Sample Backdrop in your Brute Force radiosity settings. If you'd rather use radiosity for your environment, uncheck Affect Diffuse in the Environment light setting.
Likewise, if the Environment light contributes to Specularity, you must go to the Shading Model for the surface settings for your objects, and switch from the default Raytrace + Backdrop to Raytrace.
Incorrect usage of the light will result in a doubled contribution to your renders' Diffuse and/or Specular buffers. This will mean renders that are too bright overall.

6. Originally Posted by tyrot
totally agree. I was hoping after years of octane rendering i may return native rendering.. But no . oh no no no .. .. it is so slow ... so noisy ... Once denoiser released for Octane .. we are saved completely.
How do you compare the two? Do you compare gpu & cpu that are equal in performance or do you compare apples and oranges? Would be nice to see a comparison that is between cpu & gpu that have the same performance and then see how fast octane really is. I don’t really think Octane is that much faster if you would do a fair comparison. You could also compare the two like this: take a computer with 4 xeon 16 core processors against a nvidia gts250 or equal and see what result you get?

7. ## Od tools poisson sampler examples for lw 2018

snip safx

8. Originally Posted by 50one
Yep, Kray3 is just around the corner....since 2014 at least.
For today released К3 RC3.
So although the speed of development of K3 can not be called rapid - it is quite comparable with the speed of implementation of LW 2018.
Especially considering the fact that one person works on the development of Kray.

9. I gotta say it's all starting to get a little clunky with the different switches you have to be aware of in different places, I'd like to see some competent work-flow instructions for best results provided by Newtek at some point, otherwise it starts to look like a dark art, which is not what a PBR rendering set up should be, should be simple for idiots (gamers and such). Pretend I put some sort of emoji on that to diffuse any offence taken.

10. Originally Posted by Ztreem
How do you compare the two? Do you compare gpu & cpu that are equal in performance or do you compare apples and oranges? Would be nice to see a comparison that is between cpu & gpu that have the same performance and then see how fast octane really is. I don’t really think Octane is that much faster if you would do a fair comparison. You could also compare the two like this: take a computer with 4 xeon 16 core processors against a nvidia gts250 or equal and see what result you get?
ok buy yourself a cheap second hand 780 GTX ... render any scene ... just compare the quality yourself . my point even a cheap second hand GPU can save your business with fraction of cost of a crazy CPU system.

11. Originally Posted by djwaterman
This is probably as good a thread as any to ask the question, what are people doing to combat chunky AA in bright highlights, for example with a HDR environment sun reflection, or reflection of a distant light/ Sunsky Sun etc? Just not covered in the help, so far my render tests are looking promising but the AA is awful, I don't want to mess around with settings if there is a simple workflow to combat this.
Someone else also mentioned aliasing in highlight areas - would you mind posting a scene that shows this? I'm not seeing any aliasing artifacts in the few tests I did, so not sure what you folks are talking about.

12. One of my first renders.

13. Nice though with the musical symbol (standing turn symbol for those who don't see it.) But maybe that is just a funny accident? Looks good though.

From another thread, but I had a bit of fun with volumes:

14. Originally Posted by Snosrap
One of my first renders.
render time/hardware? what settings used?

render time/hardware? what settings used?
4 minutes using an old i7 920 2.67GHZ - Settings were basically what you get when you clear a scene with the exception that I changed the "angle" of the distant light from 0 degrees to 35 and I changed the camera to 1000 x 1000 and turned the minimum samples to 4. I did get some white "speckles" on the wood around the statuette, but I removed those with PS.
Speckles, noise and AA have been a concern for me and hopefully the cause and fix can be figured out.

#### Posting Permissions

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