Author Topic: when will new caustics solver be done?  (Read 7803 times)

2020-07-23, 19:03:05

johnmarc

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile

2020-07-23, 19:26:38
Reply #1

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5434
    • View Profile
Nothing is ever "done", but iteratively gets better - the same will apply to caustics as to the rest of the render engine, where "GI bouncing" is never "done" as we find ways to make it better, and so on for all parts of the engine. As for when there will be the next iterative improvements, the roadmap is the source for that- https://trello.com/b/EfPE4kPx/corona-tentative-road-map-3ds-max
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2020-08-04, 17:23:49
Reply #2

johnmarc

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
Does rc1 have better caustic after exposing how bad caustics solver is or is that in rc2

2020-08-04, 17:29:58
Reply #3

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5434
    • View Profile
There are no changes to caustics in Corona Renderer 6 other than those noted in the changelog, see https://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php?topic=26830
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2020-08-04, 17:37:46
Reply #4

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5434
    • View Profile
And there are no plans for changes to caustics other than any listed on the roadmap: https://trello.com/b/EfPE4kPx/corona-tentative-road-map-3ds-max
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2020-08-04, 18:15:46
Reply #5

johnmarc

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
but your caustics solver is terrible even Maru and your whole community knows this

2020-08-04, 18:24:08
Reply #6

johnmarc

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile

2020-08-04, 18:26:44
Reply #7

johnmarc

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile

2020-08-04, 18:52:50
Reply #8

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5434
    • View Profile
We'll have to agree to disagree on it being terrible, and on how many people think that way (vs. how many are already putting it to use). Either way, improving something as inherently complex as a caustics solver is something that takes a long time, it is not a trivial task.
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2020-08-05, 11:24:10
Reply #9

jrgby

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 69
    • View Profile
I'm happy to wait for incremental improvements to what has to be one of the most complicated parts of the engine.

+1 for the Corona teams patience with threads like this.

2020-08-05, 16:38:07
Reply #10

dj_buckley

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 871
    • View Profile
Haha don't bring me into this.  I was merely sharing my findings.  I'm yet to be shown a 'commissioned production scene' using Caustics that isn't an outdoor pool in bright sunlight but hey ho ;)

2020-08-05, 17:00:47
Reply #11

lolec

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 179
    • View Profile
A new solver was never promised.

Caustics are notoriously hard, all render engines struggle with this problem in some form or another. Many don't have it implemented at all. Knowing the time and effort it would take to create a new solver, I think the majority of the community would prefer that time to be spent on other features.

I hear you, caustics on pools is pretty much the only commercial use case for caustics right now. But the thing is, that is pretty much the only time is really needed. Would caustics add a tiny amount of realism in some scenes? yes.

Look at this examples of architecture photography, can you find many -if any- examples of scenes that absolutely need caustics?  I couldn't find examples that even show clearly visible caustics.

In your study https://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php?topic=30007.msg172830#msg172830 you showed a few examples on how caustics are visible in everyday life*

Except, in everyday life, no one is running around with a water bottle or hose spraying water all over the floor.

Of course you would get caustics in those scenarios... but unless you specialize in a very niche market of scenes-that-were-just-sprayed-with-water I don't see the current caustics solver holding anyone back.


2020-08-05, 17:05:00
Reply #12

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 12710
  • Marcin
    • View Profile
That's actually a very important question and we are super curious about the answer:
In what specific scenarios would you like to use caustics in your scenes?

I can think of:
- pools ;)
- jewelry
- close-ups showing glassware with water/other liquids
- there are some "eye candy" effects like: sunlight reflected from windows on a building facade, sunlight reflections from cars passing through the street
Marcin Miodek | chaos-corona.com
3D Support Team Lead - Corona | contact us

2020-08-05, 17:11:01
Reply #13

lolec

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 179
    • View Profile
Also, bringing dj_buckley in a little further :) - sorry! - you said if the goal is ultimate realism, questioning the utility of caustics is odd.

I agree.

But it is clear Ultimate realism is not the goal of Corona Render.

From the beginning, Corona characterized for choosing an interesting set of compromises that brought us Speed, Ease of use and "very reasonable realism"

In other words, Corona chose to tone down the realism just a little bit and just in the right way so the engine was very fast and very easy to use and configure.

Can you do more realism? sure. at the expense of time.

Can it be even easier to use and even faster? Yes! at the expense of realism.

Corona is not about ultimate realism. It's about equilibrium.
« Last Edit: 2020-08-05, 17:14:55 by lolec »

2020-08-06, 18:52:59
Reply #14

johnmarc

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
The caustics solver needs major work and overhaul and should be number one priority of corona team as it is what Seperates
a mediocre render engine from world class as caustics are complex indirect illumination that when done correctly is what makes photo realism come to life in a render and right now caustics only work in boring simple scenes with easy light paths

2020-08-06, 19:09:29
Reply #15

johnmarc

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
Also caustics should work natively without much tweaking to any random interior and outdoor scene on turbo squid without producing fireflies all over the place that never go away and take 500 passes to even begin to remotely clean up especially when there is shiny curved objects such as metal and such

2020-08-06, 19:57:11
Reply #16

PROH

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 1219
    • View Profile
According to your definition ALL renderer are mediocre? It's not only Corona that is "exposed" (your wording) as such - but ALL renderer.

We all would like better caustic, but your wording isn't getting things moving forward.

2020-08-06, 21:37:36
Reply #17

lolec

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 179
    • View Profile
Not reading comments from other users, ignoring basic questions, repeating the same chant over and over. Not sure we need more evidence of a troll among us.

2020-08-07, 01:03:31
Reply #18

johnmarc

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
Pointing out terrible solvers for sure I am troll

2020-08-07, 01:23:53
Reply #19

lolec

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 179
    • View Profile
Answer 3 basic questions then:

1. Which render engine has a great caustic solver, that lives to your standard?

2. What kind of render scenes NEED caustics, otherwise they are not usable (for example, a pool without caustics is not usable. Jewelry render without caustics or dispersion is not usable)?

The best artists in the world are out there doing amazing renderings that I bet you can't match. And they are not complaining like a baby screaming and demanding features no one wants.

Caustics are not going to improve your renders.

2020-08-07, 15:45:54
Reply #20

johnmarc

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
johnmarc, if you will continue insulting Corona team and other forum users, i will ask admins to suspend your account. There will be no more warnings.
« Last Edit: 2020-08-07, 16:36:14 by romullus »

2020-08-07, 16:35:05
Reply #21

lolec

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 179
    • View Profile
3 times longer than what?

I really hope your animation skills are better than your ability to answer simple questions.

Here they are again, made them shorter to help you out.

1. Which render engine has caustics that you like?

2. What kind of commercial render scenes would benefit the most from having caustics?


2020-08-07, 16:39:52
Reply #22

romullus

  • Global Moderator
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 8779
  • Let's move this topic, shall we?
    • View Profile
    • My Models
lolec, i consider you to be very reasonable person, but please stop feeding this troll. I think it's pretty obvious that his intentions are not to seek for Corona improvement, but something else entirely.
I'm not Corona Team member. Everything i say, is my personal opinion only.
My Models | My Videos | My Pictures

2020-08-07, 16:41:42
Reply #23

lolec

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 179
    • View Profile
Romullus, you are right, it got to me. Done.

2020-08-08, 01:36:58
Reply #24

johnmarc

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
I never insulted any corona team members only lolec the person who thinks the caustics solver is good which it is clearly not

2020-08-08, 02:08:45
Reply #25

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5434
    • View Profile
I beg to differ. I will speak personally here - calling Corona "mediocre" is something I find insulting, due to how hard we all work on the engine. Calling the caustics solver "terrible" I find insulting, due to how hard everyone worked on that and just how complex a topic that is.

I have yet to see you point to another engine that does it better - rather you point to some ideal situation that is likely not possible for any engine or any developers, where caustics are magically possible for every scenario while only adding a modicum of extra render time, and say that since it doesn't live up to that it's "terrible".

So, speaking personally, I am insulted by both of those comments, and the way they are delivered - not in a way hopeful for what improvements the future may bring and saying what you would love to have in there and giving pointers all while understanding the timescales and difficulties involved, but rather by simply denigrating what is there already. We're always open to suggestions for improvement, but calling something mediocre and something terrible is not a suggestion for an improvement, it is just that - name calling.
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2020-08-08, 02:20:23
Reply #26

johnmarc

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile



just rendered this in rc1 and caustics just nuke entire scene with fireflies that never go away even after insane numbers of passes 500 plus frames take way too long even with 3970x

Tom G just admit the caustics solver needs major work 

2020-08-08, 02:22:06
Reply #27

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5434
    • View Profile
I am not here to "admit" anything to you. Of course there is always room for improvement. But that is not what is being discussed here, it's the way you put down what is there already.
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2020-08-08, 15:16:45
Reply #28

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 12710
  • Marcin
    • View Profile
We are aware that the caustics solver is not bullet-proof. We will keep improving it.
It is absolutely fine to report bugs and request features, but we will not tolerate trolling and offending other users and our team via forum posts and private messages.

Moving this thread to feature requests, and locking it.
Marcin Miodek | chaos-corona.com
3D Support Team Lead - Corona | contact us