New Build (304) - AccuRender nXt2024-03-28T19:28:08Zhttp://accurender.ning.com/forum/topics/new-build-304?id=6293855%3ATopic%3A65949&feed=yes&xn_auth=noThis is one of Peter's office…tag:accurender.ning.com,2012-04-19:6293855:Comment:666572012-04-19T17:35:00.391ZRoy Hirshkowitzhttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/RoyHirshkowitz
<p>This is one of Peter's office drawings-- so he's got nine large diffusers on the ceiling which might represent flush mounted fluorescent luminaires. Pretty boring, flat light, for a home (but typical for an office.) You can see the reflection of the diffusers in the glass vase. I think the simulation is good. I'm not really trying to get great images here-- mostly just looking at the convergence characteristics of the engine.</p>
<p>This is one of Peter's office drawings-- so he's got nine large diffusers on the ceiling which might represent flush mounted fluorescent luminaires. Pretty boring, flat light, for a home (but typical for an office.) You can see the reflection of the diffusers in the glass vase. I think the simulation is good. I'm not really trying to get great images here-- mostly just looking at the convergence characteristics of the engine.</p> Made a few changes to try to…tag:accurender.ning.com,2012-04-19:6293855:Comment:665572012-04-19T17:05:33.248ZRoy Hirshkowitzhttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/RoyHirshkowitz
<p>Made a few changes to try to reduce the fireflies-- 1/2 hr. 300k pixels, original file. Second image has daylighting channel turned off.…</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/55259548?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/55259548?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="708"></img></a></p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/55259652?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/55259652?profile=original" width="708"></img></a></p>
<p>Made a few changes to try to reduce the fireflies-- 1/2 hr. 300k pixels, original file. Second image has daylighting channel turned off.</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/55259548?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="708" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/55259548?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="708" class="align-full"/></a></p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/55259652?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/55259652?profile=original" width="708" class="align-full"/></a></p> It's not a mirror, BTW. It's…tag:accurender.ning.com,2012-04-18:6293855:Comment:664872012-04-18T15:42:21.778ZRoy Hirshkowitzhttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/RoyHirshkowitz
<p>It's not a mirror, BTW. It's a picture with a plate of glass over it. A true mirror would be easy to resolve. The glass probably isn't reflecting more than 10% of the light it receives, and any light that makes it all the way to the surface of the picture is, in effect, a double caustic (it must pass first through the window of the room, then through the glass of the picture.) </p>
<p>Similar, perhaps more troubling things, are happening in the plates and mugs. These materials are only…</p>
<p>It's not a mirror, BTW. It's a picture with a plate of glass over it. A true mirror would be easy to resolve. The glass probably isn't reflecting more than 10% of the light it receives, and any light that makes it all the way to the surface of the picture is, in effect, a double caustic (it must pass first through the window of the room, then through the glass of the picture.) </p>
<p>Similar, perhaps more troubling things, are happening in the plates and mugs. These materials are only partially reflective. They are having trouble completely resolving. These types of materials are scheduled for another look.</p>
<p>This is a more difficult scene, BTW, than George's window and tea party, and not just because of the materials. Zooming in on a corner of a larger space with many openings makes things take longer if the scene contains objects which reflect the entire space.</p>
<p></p>
<p>This one looked pretty good at about 45 minutes on my machine (I wouldn't hesitate to show it to clients despite the remaining noise.) Getting rid of the last of the noise with e4 is a colossal pain in the butt-- and something I'm working on (but not sure yet if there's anything I can do.)</p>
<p><br/> <cite>Garret Diduck said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.accurender.com/forum/topics/new-build-304?commentId=6293855%3AComment%3A66635&xg_source=activity#6293855Comment66702"><div><p>That is looking much better with more passes. Besides the mirror not resolving, there are still fireflies on the mug as well. My concern is that, while the overall image is quite good, the render will need to cook a lot longer (than the PT) to get the fireflies to resolve enough to make the image acceptable to a client. To get, say, 15000 passes would take quite awhile to resolve and even then, the image may still have fireflies. </p>
</div>
</blockquote> George, yes, I prefer the E4,…tag:accurender.ning.com,2012-04-18:6293855:Comment:665452012-04-18T15:18:10.784ZMarc Chaumierhttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/MarcChaumier
<p>George, yes, I prefer the E4, but if I have not enough time, the result is better with E1. When you can let it cook long time, so the picture with the E4 is much better.</p>
<p>Roy, I let a little space between the paving stone of the balcony and the frosted glass, so I believed that it was an problem with the curve. Keep on this way, Roy, the 304 was a good improvement of the E4, which is really attractive. I send you the dwg.</p>
<p>George, yes, I prefer the E4, but if I have not enough time, the result is better with E1. When you can let it cook long time, so the picture with the E4 is much better.</p>
<p>Roy, I let a little space between the paving stone of the balcony and the frosted glass, so I believed that it was an problem with the curve. Keep on this way, Roy, the 304 was a good improvement of the E4, which is really attractive. I send you the dwg.</p> I'm colour-blind, so I call s…tag:accurender.ning.com,2012-04-18:6293855:Comment:666352012-04-18T15:16:24.984ZMarc Chaumierhttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/MarcChaumier
<p>I'm colour-blind, so I call sometimes my wife for colors advices. And my comment was about to say that one looks more natural than the other... The judge, in last is the eye, I believe... And I was talking about the 303.</p>
<p>You're right, my job is to give better pictures... Natural, accurate... Sometimes, a lie says more truth than an accuracy ;D<br></br> <br></br> <cite>Roy Hirshkowitz said:…</cite></p>
<p>I'm colour-blind, so I call sometimes my wife for colors advices. And my comment was about to say that one looks more natural than the other... The judge, in last is the eye, I believe... And I was talking about the 303.</p>
<p>You're right, my job is to give better pictures... Natural, accurate... Sometimes, a lie says more truth than an accuracy ;D<br/> <br/> <cite>Roy Hirshkowitz said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.accurender.com/forum/topics/new-build-304?id=6293855%3ATopic%3A65949&page=3#6293855Comment66706"><div class="xg_user_generated"><p>I can appreciate that you (and your wife) might prefer e1-- but my job is to make the simulation more accurate-- not to make the picture better (that's your job.) <br/> <br/><br/></p>
</div>
</blockquote> Careful-- I haven't run the t…tag:accurender.ning.com,2012-04-18:6293855:Comment:667062012-04-18T14:37:43.425ZRoy Hirshkowitzhttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/RoyHirshkowitz
<p>Careful-- I haven't run the thing with curtains and lights. Some of the contrast will likely go away. I can appreciate that you (and your wife) might prefer e1-- but my job is to make the simulation more accurate-- not to make the picture better (that's your job.) <br></br> <br></br> <cite>Marc Chaumier said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.accurender.com/forum/topics/new-build-304?page=3&commentId=6293855%3AComment%3A66705&x=1#6293855Comment66701"><p>The contrast and the depth of…</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Careful-- I haven't run the thing with curtains and lights. Some of the contrast will likely go away. I can appreciate that you (and your wife) might prefer e1-- but my job is to make the simulation more accurate-- not to make the picture better (that's your job.) <br/> <br/> <cite>Marc Chaumier said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.accurender.com/forum/topics/new-build-304?page=3&commentId=6293855%3AComment%3A66705&x=1#6293855Comment66701"><p>The contrast and the depth of the shadows was better with E1(comparison with 303). </p>
<p>...</p>
<p>Now, it seems that you have done a tone correction in the 304, this one look much better! </p>
</blockquote> Anything with transparency ma…tag:accurender.ning.com,2012-04-18:6293855:Comment:667052012-04-18T14:31:20.158ZRoy Hirshkowitzhttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/RoyHirshkowitz
<p>Anything with transparency may look a little different (sometimes a lot different.) In general, e4 will be the more accurate engine in these cases since it doesn't rely on a trick called "transparent shadow rays" when dealing with refractive surfaces. On the other hand, it has a much more difficult problem to solve so convergence may be an issue.</p>
<p>I'm pretty sure the problem labeled "curved faces" is similar to the problem labeled "why" and related to e1's incorrect treatment of…</p>
<p>Anything with transparency may look a little different (sometimes a lot different.) In general, e4 will be the more accurate engine in these cases since it doesn't rely on a trick called "transparent shadow rays" when dealing with refractive surfaces. On the other hand, it has a much more difficult problem to solve so convergence may be an issue.</p>
<p>I'm pretty sure the problem labeled "curved faces" is similar to the problem labeled "why" and related to e1's incorrect treatment of rough transparency. Not completely sure, but I doubt if it really has anything to do with curved surfaces.<br/> <br/> <cite>Marc Chaumier said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.accurender.com/forum/topics/new-build-304?commentId=6293855%3AComment%3A66704&xg_source=activity#6293855Comment66704"><div><p>I don't know if I have to open a new thread, but they are 2 or 3 points I have noticed, in the difference between E1 et E4. One of them is very curious. It is about the deal with curved faces. Look at the two pictures, made with the same model, exactly, one with E1, the other with E4.</p>
</div>
</blockquote> Which one is better for you M…tag:accurender.ning.com,2012-04-18:6293855:Comment:664792012-04-18T13:34:45.726ZGeorge Ioannidishttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/GeorgeIoannidis
<p>Which one is better for you Marc? I think E4 looks more "natural".</p>
<p>Which one is better for you Marc? I think E4 looks more "natural".</p> I don't know if I have to ope…tag:accurender.ning.com,2012-04-18:6293855:Comment:667042012-04-18T13:31:08.667ZMarc Chaumierhttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/MarcChaumier
<p>I don't know if I have to open a new thread, but they are 2 or 3 points I have noticed, in the difference between E1 et E4. One of them is very curious. It is about the deal with curved faces. Look at the two pictures, made with the same model, exactly, one with E1, the other with E4.…<a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/55259682?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/55259682?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="721"></img></a></p>
<p>I don't know if I have to open a new thread, but they are 2 or 3 points I have noticed, in the difference between E1 et E4. One of them is very curious. It is about the deal with curved faces. Look at the two pictures, made with the same model, exactly, one with E1, the other with E4.<a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/55259682?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="721" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/55259682?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="721" class="align-full"/></a></p> That is looking much better w…tag:accurender.ning.com,2012-04-18:6293855:Comment:667022012-04-18T12:37:05.486ZGarret Diduckhttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/GarretDiduck
<p>That is looking much better with more passes. Besides the mirror not resolving, there are still fireflies on the mug as well. My concern is that, while the overall image is quite good, the render will need to cook a lot longer (than the PT) to get the fireflies to resolve enough to make the image acceptable to a client. To get, say, 15000 passes would take quite awhile to resolve and even then, the image may still have fireflies. </p>
<p>That is looking much better with more passes. Besides the mirror not resolving, there are still fireflies on the mug as well. My concern is that, while the overall image is quite good, the render will need to cook a lot longer (than the PT) to get the fireflies to resolve enough to make the image acceptable to a client. To get, say, 15000 passes would take quite awhile to resolve and even then, the image may still have fireflies. </p>