Author Topic: Daily Builds 1.5  (Read 113453 times)

2016-10-04, 16:12:05
Reply #615

cecofuli

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 1577
    • View Profile
    • www.francescolegrenzi.com
Hi,
"Reset color", "all to 1" and "all to 0"... Is there a possibility to avoid the "confirmation dialog"?
I know, it's a "no problem". But, when I work, this pop-up is a little bit annoying.

Thanks
« Last Edit: 2016-10-04, 16:25:42 by cecofuli »

2016-10-05, 05:32:04
Reply #616

Christa Noel

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 911
  • God bless us everyone
    • View Profile
    • dionch.studio
Hi,
"Reset color", "all to 1" and "all to 0"... Is there a possibility to avoid the "confirmation dialog"?
I know, it's a "no problem". But, when I work, this pop-up is a little bit annoying.

Thanks
when I have hundreds lights, I cant imagine if that lot of values I set got reset immediately right when I accidently press the reset button :)

2016-10-05, 09:45:05
Reply #617

Dionysios.TS

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 766
    • View Profile
    • Evolvia Imaging
Saw the RC3, great job guys!!!!

Dionysios -

2016-10-05, 21:00:33
Reply #618

antanas

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 269
  • Hmm ...
    • View Profile
Final Rc ... so no chance of getting one shared savable preset for both lightmix and post settings in final 1.5 ? If so, it's a pity, as it would be quite useful.
« Last Edit: 2016-10-05, 21:04:09 by antanas »

2016-10-06, 00:02:05
Reply #619

Ludvik Koutny

  • VIP
  • Active Users
  • ***
  • Posts: 2557
  • Just another user
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Final Rc ... so no chance of getting one shared savable preset for both lightmix and post settings in final 1.5 ? If so, it's a pity, as it would be quite useful.

There would have to be switch between linking both presets together and keeping them unlinked, as them being unlinked is mostly desired. LightMix preset is scene specific where as post preset can be used in any scene. This doesn't make much sense in general, and can be useful only on very specific cases.

I don't think having to click load twice instead of once is such a big deal. It's not an action you will be doing dozens of times a minute.

2016-10-06, 14:35:11
Reply #620

antanas

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 269
  • Hmm ...
    • View Profile
 Well, I see your point but I do not agree, lightmix is scene specific, yeah but tweaking lightmix without post settings is well not to handy, accurate, realistic or even sensible way to do things to say the least. Especially when all lights are set up closely to the manufacturers specifications (ies, power, temperature, light source size) and when one does a day render without them and night or evening or both with them on, without going wild with the lightmix sliders intensities - I, for instance, tend to use only two positions 0-1 which is well the only way to go if you want to get +- close to real results preserving realistic light power consistency across the different light sources (except if you're planning to use some dimmable light sources or dim the environment for the evening render but that's another matter). So in that semi-simulation case the post settings needs to be tweaked for each lighmix preset (group of lights) regardless of what one wants, of course one could achieve some results tweaking lighmix element intensities and colors but that is unintuitive way to do things for such tasks and not consistent with interior photography in different lighting conditions - white balance, exposure, and yeah non present in cameras but still very needed highlight compress, needs to be set up for each shot (or afterwards) if one does not rely on automatic camera settings, not to say different requirements for glare and bloom for each of those lighting conditions.
 On the usefulness of Post presets across different scenes, well yeah that is the case but why not just simply ignore the lighmix settings saved from the scene where it was enabled when loading that preset to a different scene - either to the one not containing lightmix element at all (that would be the simplest) or the one containing different and differently named lightmix elements. Well those render elements are usually named differently across the scenes so I honestly don't see the problem with ignoring those which are not present in that scene and if there are the same named ones all the better (I could find a use for that too when using same light by the same manufacturers across the different scenes) - yeah I see the potential problem if people will accidentally leave some of them named by default but is that such a problem to fix that later after render and save the preset anew for that new scene ?
 And about the frequency of use, well that depends on the scene - did some interior recently where each camera required up to 6 lightmix presets for different lighting conditions\scenarios evaluation by the client - so yeah it is easy to get lost in all of those saved configs - there were 12of them 6 for lightmix and 6 for post, each named to be recognizable as the part of the other one like "interior night top lights only LIGHTMIX.conf" accompanied by the "interior night top lights only POST.conf" and so on, thus I needed to load them twelve times for each render no to big of a chore but still could be made easier to manage if they could share both settings + when the both of configs have the same extension it's too easy to accidentally overwrite the saved post preset with lighmix's one and vice versa which can lead to lots of frustrations when the deadline is near and there's a couple of views to render.
 If my chaotic writing still doesn't convince you what the shared presets are needed, then as a compromise I would suggest what at least the extensions of those configs should be made different - that would settle it for me, at least to some point ))

2016-10-06, 16:15:30
Reply #621

pokoy

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 1865
    • View Profile
Here's a show stopper, at least for me.

The  IR lag now happens with standard cameras with a CoronaCameraMod applied. Seems it was already the case with RC1 but I only now happened to render through camera views. Updated to RC4 and it's still there.
Any change of environment, light, sun etc. will result in a lag before IR updates while it's instant when rendering in a perspective view or without the CoronaCameraMod.

Also, shouldn't the Refresh button restart with IR? It doesn't do anything for me.
« Last Edit: 2016-10-06, 16:32:17 by pokoy »

2016-10-06, 16:37:33
Reply #622

3dwannab

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 362
    • View Profile
IR for me is slow in scenes with 3million polys and obj in isolation mode.

Say when I isolate an object and fire up IR. It take 15-20secs to compute and start.

Should this be the case when the isolated object is not many polys at all? Seems the hidden geo is getting parsed too. I should of mentioned it before. My bad.

DB RC4

2016-10-07, 16:47:13
Reply #623

Ludvik Koutny

  • VIP
  • Active Users
  • ***
  • Posts: 2557
  • Just another user
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
I've also noticed a lot of lag and UI freezing when using IR with slate editor in latest RC.

2016-10-07, 16:58:22
Reply #624

pokoy

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 1865
    • View Profile
I'm seeing VFB UI flashes in IR mode, I think this started with RC1 and is still visible in RC4 for me.

2016-10-07, 20:49:12
Reply #625

denisgo22

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 700
    • View Profile
Using Lightmix and Denoise system's together recently turned to me a major problem while rendering animation project////
Almost every light source in scene /in light set's/ need to turn on /Apply denoising/ option in render elements for correct result in LightMix,
whereby the time taken for denoise process can become virtually equal to the rendering process of the one frame, or even much more depending on the number of light sources...
For example:
Rendering of one frame in resolution HD 1920/1080 with only 3 elements /Environment, Corona Sun, 1 Corona Light,/ with 12 passes in my scene take 5 min without Denoise,
and only Denoise of all this Elements take 2 minutes/=7 --- almost HALF of all time --- only Denoise Filter///
I think this is also true for still images/// in resolution 4k and interior with 10 different lights sources, denoise process
may take ten times longer than the rendering process itself///
In this situation, it turns out that it is better not to use something, or Denoise, or LightMix, than does not give any advantage as no time and no quality of render/
hence the question of how to solve this problem?
is it possible to apply LightMix directly to Beauty element   and apply Denoise Filter only to Beauty Element - without denoising of all Light sources in scene???
« Last Edit: 2016-10-07, 21:15:19 by denisgo22 »

2016-10-07, 21:01:14
Reply #626

Avan

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 120
    • View Profile
Is it possible to add Layer Blend into new corona LUT feature? The opacity is quite useful but for me the using of blending modes helps to improve final image a lot. (In the PS).

2016-10-07, 21:24:49
Reply #627

moadr

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 58
    • View Profile
    • Vermeer by Stableworks
When I render something in interactive render and than try to save an image out of the framebuffer, Max crashes on me. If you need any more info on that, please let me know.
Adrian Moorsel

Vermeer by Stableworks   |   https://stableworks.tech

2016-10-07, 21:29:57
Reply #628

antanas

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 269
  • Hmm ...
    • View Profile
@denisgo22 Don't think that's possible due to a how denoising works and that would probably destroy the other lighmix elements with some weird and I mean really, really weird denoise patterns coming from the beauty pass but that's only what I think how it works so it might not be the case. About speed, well I personally have no problems with that as my renders usually take from 1.5 to 3h each (and that's if i'm lucky) and denoising even when rendering 4k with 8 or more denoising enabled lighselect elements takes only a tiny fraction of that time - still it can probably be made quicker if corona's team could make it use openCl (hopefully not cuda for if cuda then it's no go for me and to many other non NVidia people out there) making use of gpu's too for the task - vray for instance does denoising pretty quickly because of that.
What I'm really wondering if adaptivity could be used for those lightselect passes too - that would surely take down rendertimes significantly. But I guess if that could be done as quickly as one wishes, Corona's team would have done that already ) Sadly, for now the difference in noise levels of the beauty pass and the lightselect ones is tremendous due to them being rendered the old way, well, without adaptivity, and that's probably even worsens the chances of a beauty pass's denoising to be usable for lightselect elements due to a difference of those noise patterns.   

2016-10-07, 22:41:04
Reply #629

denisgo22

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 700
    • View Profile
@denisgo22 Don't think that's possible due to a how denoising works and that would probably destroy the other lighmix elements with some weird and I mean really, really weird denoise patterns coming from the beauty pass but that's only what I think how it works so it might not be the case. About speed, well I personally have no problems with that as my renders usually take from 1.5 to 3h each (and that's if i'm lucky) and denoising even when rendering 4k with 8 or more denoising enabled lighselect elements takes only a tiny fraction of that time - still it can probably be made quicker if corona's team could make it use openCl (hopefully not cuda for if cuda then it's no go for me and to many other non NVidia people out there) making use of gpu's too for the task - vray for instance does denoising pretty quickly because of that.
What I'm really wondering if adaptivity could be used for those lightselect passes too - that would surely take down rendertimes significantly. But I guess if that could be done as quickly as one wishes, Corona's team would have done that already ) Sadly, for now the difference in noise levels of the beauty pass and the lightselect ones is tremendous due to them being rendered the old way, well, without adaptivity, and that's probably even worsens the chances of a beauty pass's denoising to be usable for lightselect elements due to a difference of those noise patterns.   

As I know in Vray exist possibility to apply Denoise Filter also to RGB channel /Beauty pass/, also only to elements /Reflection,Refraction and etc./ -- for you choice///
Why can not do the same in Corona only for LIghtMix???
And may be for still images it is not so important /in the end, exist opportunity wait for another 2 hours and render without any Denoise at all :)
 /but for animation /where most need Denoise option for "time and money"/--it particularly necessary.
I just want to say that at the moment it is very inconvenient...
In any case, the last word still for developers :)
« Last Edit: 2016-10-07, 22:54:07 by denisgo22 »