|
|
Renderer suggestions
About Truespace Archives
These pages are a copy of the official truespace forums prior to their removal somewhere around 2011.
They are retained here for archive purposes only.
Renderer suggestions // Feature suggestions
Post by Asem // Feb 24, 2006, 9:10am
|
Asem
Total Posts: 255
|
There could be other issues for the other renderers but with this case it affects the virtualight and vray. It would be great if we could have an on and off option on the lights would emit photons or not emit photons instead of them all having to emit (meaning what is availiable to the renderers) when we turn on the caustics or the GI(I think the GI).
I gather that the renderers collect information for the lights that are emiting photons and in some cases that wouldn't be neccessary and could cut the amount of time needed for the renderers to collect photons. |
Post by teffo // Mar 9, 2006, 9:50am
|
teffo
Total Posts: 7
|
I think that's a good idea.
Vray GI takes forever with many lights emitting. I thought there was some plugin for this however... but forget where I read this.
Teffo |
Post by GraySho // Mar 9, 2006, 10:22am
|
GraySho
Total Posts: 695
|
I think that's a good idea.
Vray GI takes forever with many lights emitting. I thought there was some plugin for this however... but forget where I read this.
Teffo
The idea of GI is to simulate real world lighting conditions, so you won't have to use that many light sources in most cases. Though the idea to switch photons on/off per light source sounds like a good idea. |
Post by nowherebrain // Mar 11, 2006, 7:31pm
|
nowherebrain
Total Posts: 1062
|
I'm interested in knowing how much acces is available to Caligari in regards to the Vlight renderer.....'cause I would like to see some tweaks to the amount of photon(irradiance)bluring..,this and adjusting the irradiance gamma, would greatly improve the renderer. I know Stephane Marty is no longer playing with this renderer anymore. I also wonder if his Metropol Light Transport may make it into 7.1 or later? |
Post by Asem // Mar 12, 2006, 12:32am
|
Asem
Total Posts: 255
|
The thing about vlight is that it used to let you save the photons and gi maps but for some wierd reason they(Caligari) ended up taking it out. The reason I asked about this for an option is to decrease the rendering time at least in regards to caustics/GI and being able to maybe pull off some NPR pictures. Building weird worlds that break the laws of physics( that regard light or whatever):D. Although, from what has been spoken in the forums (mainly the old) saving caustic/GI maps may be availiable in the next version.
I also wonder if his Metropol Light Transport may make it into 7.1 or later?
That would be neat but I haven't heard much of anything and I visit his website from time to time ,but it's not like I've emailed him. |
Post by Asem // Mar 12, 2006, 12:35am
|
Asem
Total Posts: 255
|
Another thing ,and this regards Vray, is that volumetrics do not work with it. I would hope this is in the update but I may be wrong if any one can verify this tell me. Unless it's there but I'm doing something wrong.
Thanks. |
Post by Asem // Mar 12, 2006, 12:58am
|
Asem
Total Posts: 255
|
This is mostly about changing the lights easier. You set a light in the scene and it's a spot light but then you realize because of the changes you made that you might weant to change it to a area light so you would have to delete the spot light and create another which would be the area light.
My point is that instead of having to do that and save a couple of steps why not have some type of list withen the light node to easily switch the type of light so you don't need to try go through the many steps. It also enables you to test out different light situations faster.
This is mostly just something to cut steps out but it might be worth it. |
Post by GraySho // Mar 12, 2006, 5:12am
|
GraySho
Total Posts: 695
|
Very good point here Asem. I wish there would be more control about the render and light settings in general. Though I guess the possibilities of Caligari are quite limited, since all the renderers are 3rd party developments.
I would also wish that some objects could be excluded from the foreground shaders by a simple checkbox. A skydome not affected by volumetrics or fog for example. I particulary find it hard to set up a real world outdoor envoirment without having to do postwork to achive satisfying results. |
Post by Asem // Mar 12, 2006, 12:53pm
|
Asem
Total Posts: 255
|
The thing is ,with regards to vray, they have the full vray advance sdk and it does have support for many of these things like volumetrics. I guess I wouldn't mind neccessarily doing post processing for some things but the thing is I really want to use ts7 for animation (waiting for the new animation tools) and it be great to ,at least at some point, have some of these features implemented. (I think vlight too)
I think what holds them back is the agreement they made with choas group which we have no clue what it covers except that as Roman said that it was close to the advance version which I can believe that. I don't even mind paying extra to get some of features that are really prone to the advance version.
Hey what ever happened to network rendering anyway? also be nice to have network rendering somehow implemented instead of using a plug-in.
One last thing at the moment would be an option for the renderer to render to a newly open window with save options because I'm getting a little tired of accidently moving the mouse and then having to do it all over again.
take a look:
http://www.chaosgroup.com/news/20040604-01.html |
Post by Alien // Mar 12, 2006, 7:29pm
|
Alien
Total Posts: 1231
|
Wow! Some of the stuff that company did with Vray was awesome. Especially liked the Implicit Surfaces idea. If Caligari could come up with stuff like that, that would be brilliant. |
Post by parva // Mar 12, 2006, 11:28pm
|
parva
Total Posts: 822
|
...they have the full vray advance sdk and it does have support for many of these things like volumetrics.
Are you sure about this. They use the Vray SDK this is right but you can't compare it with the 3ds Max Vray Advanced or Basic version.
Volumetrics are still difficult to create with 3ds max vray without layering effects.
If you want to use it for animation, wait for the v1. There you have the ability to store the GI solution which will help you in some cases.
Hey what ever happened to network rendering anyway?
Currently there is no way to integrate Distributed Rendering but I would recommend to use the plugin "Ts NET" which supports Vray and Vlight as well.
One last thing at the moment would be an option for the renderer to render to a newly open window with save options because I'm getting a little tired of accidently moving the mouse and then having to do it all over again.
Again this is (maybe) a future addition if G-buffer/ Frame buffer can be added you get a separate output window.
Wow! Some of the stuff that company did with Vray was awesome. Especially liked the Implicit Surfaces idea. If Caligari could come up with stuff like that, that would be brilliant.
:) Sure why not. They used the same SDK. Implicit Surfaces create still heavy flickering at rendering animation but dimo works on it. The company is known for some really exciting stuff. |
Post by Asem // Mar 13, 2006, 1:10am
|
Asem
Total Posts: 255
|
The sdk is the same. It is the advance version as Roman had mentioned it. What makes them different(ts' and 3ds max's vray) is what the company is using it for and how they implement the features ,so I wouldn't say the differences are not too widely different.
I also did not read close enough about it not really having volumetrics from the start ,but I would still like to see this added at some point in time. I'm just trying to come up with features I or anyone else might want to see later on because of the fact they have the sdk and so have the ability to add(from what vray already has) and create new features.
create features like implicite surfaces as did the company from the link.
I didn't think tsnet would work with vray so thanks for telling me. I'll pick it up after vray 1.0.:)
By all means if the feature is there tell me so thanks parva :D |
Post by Alien // Mar 13, 2006, 5:57am
|
Alien
Total Posts: 1231
|
Implicit Surfaces create still heavy flickering at rendering animation but dimo works on it.
I looked at the sample animations & they didn't look flickery to me, infact that 1 viewing the ocean's surface from above it - if I hadn't known it was CG I would have believed it was real. |
Post by parva // Mar 14, 2006, 1:37am
|
parva
Total Posts: 822
|
yes the implicit surfaces are newer ones where the flickering could be eliminated very well as well as the memory consumption.
procedural geometry is a very cool thing.
here is another vid from dimo: ani (http://www.dimo3d.info/animated.mov) |
Post by Asem // Mar 14, 2006, 2:24am
|
Asem
Total Posts: 255
|
All in all it would be a nice feature to see in ts7 vray at sometime. I guess it depends on how many would like it to be made. At least I would think. Any other ideas :)
That animation is pretty cool also parva. |
|
