Author Topic: Tonemapping - Plz Halp  (Read 63301 times)

2020-05-02, 17:38:23
Reply #105

Juraj

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 4312
    • View Profile
    • studio website
I see now, thank you. Yes that would point against tonemapping.

talcikdemovicova.com  Website and blog
be.net/jurajtalcik   Our studio Behance portfolio
Instagram   Our studio Instagram, managed by Veronika

2020-05-02, 18:08:30
Reply #106

Designerman77

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 507
    • View Profile
Right now I'm totally struggling with an empty bathroom scene my client wants rendered.
Mo matter what I do, it all the time looks unrealistic due to lighting, colors, etc.
When I turn up the contrasts, the shadow tones start to get too colorful, etc. Sure, one can "fix" it in post...

But as I mentioned before: the "proportions" of light/shadow, colors, etc. simply do look not realistic.
And from such a "soup" it is hard to do miracles in Photoshop.


Annoying... one loses hours and hours instead of simply getting jobs done.
« Last Edit: 2020-05-02, 18:11:56 by Designerman77 »

2020-05-02, 21:31:24
Reply #107

Fluss

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 553
    • View Profile
Here is another misconception: Most of the time, if your render looks too saturated after tone mapping, it's because your diffuse (or any other colormap it is) was set too saturated on the first sight.
« Last Edit: 2020-05-02, 21:38:46 by Fluss »

2020-05-02, 22:19:03
Reply #108

Designerman77

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 507
    • View Profile
Here is another misconception: Most of the time, if your render looks too saturated after tone mapping, it's because your diffuse (or any other colormap it is) was set too saturated on the first sight.


Thanks for your reply, Fluss.
Neither the original JPG (texture) was too saturated, nor did I not additionally desaturate it in C4D. I do take care for this detail and almost always desaturate bitmaps.

Let´s be honest... one cannot talk away the fact that Corona is not so easy in the topic of tone mapping, etc.
I see this in hundreds and hundreds of renders, even from super good artists like Angelo Ferretti.
I bought some scenes from him to see how others work. Same thing with colors in many of his scenes, too.






« Last Edit: 2020-05-02, 22:22:59 by Designerman77 »

2020-05-03, 00:18:13
Reply #109

twoheads

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 261
    • View Profile
If I may add my two cents, this discussion can be boiled down to braking bad's quote: "after all, how pure can pure be?"
For most people 96% purity is more than enough and for some people difference between 96 and 99 is not just noticeable it is like tremendous gulf.


2020-05-03, 00:52:31
Reply #110

bluebox

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 268
    • View Profile
Since I never tested fstorm I cant tell what causes this but I noriced this on Bertrands scene he sell. The Fstorm has much stronger direct light. Why is it? Clamped GI? Is it accidental or intentional. It gives the space more readable light in way that I doubt is due to tonemapping.

Someone would have to do a deep dive becayse the features have odd parity in behavior. Fstorm HDRI has two modes (weird option to cut off direct light?), their portal light effectively becomes new area light (like one option in Vray).

Very hard to pick out what exactly is the cause with so many variables.

With Dubcat, we suspected the shader. I wonder if something lije OrenNayar wouldnt cause more highlights from durect light?

I was trying to pinpoint what is the difference between the two engines and came to the same conclusion as you have Juraj that in Fstorm light seems to be more directional.

Flash-light renders looked totaly photorealistic back in the vray 3 days even with crappy shaders. This thogether with superior tonemapping is imho the key to ultimate realism.

Can't say tho whether the directionality comes from the shader as you guys with Dubcat suspected or form the GI algorithm.

Asked about Oren-nayar shader model in the daily builds but the devs haven't picked up the conversation. Take a look:



It instantly looks 10 times more realistic. The devs tho are busy with according to trello "key new features" like faster colour picker....

2020-05-03, 07:56:58
Reply #111

noldo

  • Users
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Since I never tested fstorm I cant tell what causes this but I noriced this on Bertrands scene he sell. The Fstorm has much stronger direct light. Why is it? Clamped GI? Is it accidental or intentional. It gives the space more readable light in way that I doubt is due to tonemapping.

Someone would have to do a deep dive becayse the features have odd parity in behavior. Fstorm HDRI has two modes (weird option to cut off direct light?), their portal light effectively becomes new area light (like one option in Vray).

Very hard to pick out what exactly is the cause with so many variables.

With Dubcat, we suspected the shader. I wonder if something lije OrenNayar wouldnt cause more highlights from durect light?

I was trying to pinpoint what is the difference between the two engines and came to the same conclusion as you have Juraj that in Fstorm light seems to be more directional.

Flash-light renders looked totaly photorealistic back in the vray 3 days even with crappy shaders. This thogether with superior tonemapping is imho the key to ultimate realism.

Can't say tho whether the directionality comes from the shader as you guys with Dubcat suspected or form the GI algorithm.

Asked about Oren-nayar shader model in the daily builds but the devs haven't picked up the conversation. Take a look:



It instantly looks 10 times more realistic. The devs tho are busy with according to trello "key new features" like faster colour picker....

Absolutely, but fstorm also manages the diffuse roughness better, with much softer brightness variations as the roughness increases

2020-05-03, 08:49:45
Reply #112

cjwidd

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 1067
    • View Profile
    • Artstation
I really don't think Oren-Nayar is going to span the gulf between expectations about realism and what is currently achievable with Corona or any other renderer for that matter; you won't even notice Oren-Nayar unless the surface is very rough.

2020-05-03, 10:53:01
Reply #113

Designerman77

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 507
    • View Profile
If I may add my two cents, this discussion can be boiled down to braking bad's quote: "after all, how pure can pure be?"
For most people 96% purity is more than enough and for some people difference between 96 and 99 is not just noticeable it is like tremendous gulf.



In my yesterdays "trivial bathroom"-scene, I again could see that it is not about "96% or 99%". :)
It was simply impossible to get a decent lighting and material look with the on-board tools in Corona.
Tweaking in PS Cam Raw was necessary, in order to get something out off the dull, raw render.

One can of course argue that it is the same with real RAW pics out of pro cameras.
BUT: sorry, 3D render engine users who need to meet client deadlines would have an easier life without massive post production.
In most cases, it is okay what comes directly out of Corona engine.
However, in this case of shitty, small room with sand colored tiles, etc. Corona clearly seems to meet its limits.
And yes, I also tried artificial lights inside the room... looked even more unnatural, despite trying different tones - from white to whatever, IES and non IES lights, etc.








 

2020-05-03, 14:35:59
Reply #114

ynotsop

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 39
    • View Profile
I love Corona but here is a nice example where Fstorm really shines:

Photo by Eric Floberg captured with Canon EOS-1D X MARK II (I think):
http://tiny.cc/l93aoz

Kitchen interior from Johannes:
https://viz.guru/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Test8.jpg
« Last Edit: 2020-05-03, 14:43:50 by ynotsop »

2020-05-03, 15:41:26
Reply #115

twoheads

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 261
    • View Profile
I love Corona but here is a nice example where Fstorm really shines:

Photo by Eric Floberg captured with Canon EOS-1D X MARK II (I think):
http://tiny.cc/l93aoz

Kitchen interior from Johannes:
https://viz.guru/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Test8.jpg
In my opinion this comparison proves absolutely nothing. Never tried fstorm so I can't tell for sure if its tonemapping is superior to corona's but yeah it looks like it is.

Have you seen fstorm's gallery on their website? (this one is for all of us) For my taste it shows variety of good and average shots both architectural and product design, exactly the same as corona's gallery and so what?
My point is that corona is a tool which in right hands can produce as good results as fstorm, maybe not as fast and easy but it definitely can. Poor models, low texture quality and so on can make the best renderer in the world just average. I don't think the way fstorm handles tonemapping is the answer here. We take Johannes's work as an example but he's one of the best in the business and even his work really stands off.

Lastly, "that horrible reinhard's burn in the background is unacceptable" type of clients are the worst, they really kill creativity :)

side note: it's just my personal opinion, no offence.





2020-05-03, 15:51:15
Reply #116

lupaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 711
    • View Profile
My point is that corona is a tool which in right hands can produce as good results as fstorm, maybe not as fast and easy but it definitely can.

Not saying this isn't true, but can you post a couple of images from any artist you want, made with corona, that tricks your brain to believe it's a photo?

edit: or maybe we should do a "photo or corona" game, to be fair to corona.

2020-05-03, 17:20:41
Reply #117

ynotsop

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 39
    • View Profile
We take Johannes's work as an example but he's one of the best in the business and even his work really stands off.

If we are trying to evaluate render engine realism it's only natural to compare real photos with the work of the best artists in the industry. The strange thing is that I saw the real kitchen photo I posted many months ago and it suddenly popped into my head while I was looking at Johaness' work. That's why I posted his work but in all fairness I should have posted another similar interior from (insert your favourite CGI artist) who uses Corona. If I take the best Corona image I can find and compare it to the two images I posted I can clearly see that Fstorm's render looks more photorealistic. Even when comparing it with the latest work from Jakub Cech which is drop dead gorgeous.

With regards to Fstorm the only way I can explain it is as if the materials have more "depth" along with what was already said about better tonemapping. In my opinion Fstorm users have the advantage of creating better looking materials because of the built-in tonemapping which gives them the ability to see materials how a camera would see it. In Corona you have to fiddle around with the sliders and LUTs until you feel satisfied and go on from there. Some Corona users get better at this, some master it, some don't and some never will.

I'm not trying to bash Corona because it's a great render engine and it got me excited about CGI again but as with all things there is always room for improvement.
« Last Edit: 2020-05-03, 17:46:04 by ynotsop »

2020-05-03, 17:35:17
Reply #118

giona4

  • Primary Certified Instructor
  • Active Users
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
    • Giona Andreani 3D Visualization

edit: or maybe we should do a "photo or corona" game, to be fair to corona.

We did that one year ago, and the survey results ended with more people saying that the photo was the render :)

2020-05-03, 17:45:40
Reply #119

twoheads

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 261
    • View Profile
In my opinion Fstorm users have the advantage of creating better looking materials because of the built-in tonemapping which gives them the ability to see materials how a camera would see it. In Corona you have to fiddle around with the sliders until you feel satisfied and go on from there. Some Corona users get better at this, some master it, some don't and some never will.

Agree. Built-in tonemapping really? I need to give fstorm a try and fiddle with it.

there is always room for improvement.
As above!

To be honest I like to make shaders. Tweaking it, changing parameters here and there and see results in IR. It gives me satisfaction and peace of mind :)