New Energy conservation mode

[Ludvik Koutny]

As i said. It was noted but ended up ignored.

It's actually a bit worse in some cases. Imagine regular archviz scene where client wants walls to be painted with rough shiny paint. Actually, most of the wall paints are quite reflective, just very rough.

It ends up looking like this, where wall, captured from flat angle, turns out looking as if it's diffuse component was painted almost completely black...


Or imagine client wants bright rough concrete floor. If you capture it from regular angle it looks good.


But then you do a low shot, and it turns from bright gray to dark gray.

[twoheads]

I think it's quite common.......then you hear complaints from client "why this concrete floor looks so dark?"

Best solution is to avoid worm's eye view or as you said low angles in general shots.

[fabioazevedo]

Yes, totally right Rawalanche.
That's also how I found out to begin with... doing the usual matte light grey override material to check lighting.

Should we start a new thread specific for this?
Ondra what can we do to convince you to find a solution? and how can we help?

[Ludvik Koutny]

I think it's quite common.......then you hear complaints from client "why this concrete floor looks so dark?"

Best solution is to avoid worm's eye view or as you said low angles in general shots.

I don't know of any other renderer that hasn't it fixed yet.

[twoheads]

Just for clarification, It's not about avoiding low angles at all :)

[twoheads]

I think it's quite common.......then you hear complaints from client "why this concrete floor looks so dark?"

Best solution is to avoid worm's eye view or as you said low angles in general shots.

I don't know of any other renderer that hasn't it fixed yet.

totally agree :)

[lacilaci]

Well, in case of wallpaint the black wall looks really bad.. But it can be avoided using very high IOR and low reflectivity..

Now I know this isn't how you would like to go about materials, using some weird values, but in that scenario it is avoidable problem.

[Ricky Johnson]

As it stands in version 1.0 is the 'Legacy' checkbox controlling both BRDF and the Energy Conservation Mode?

i.e. Is it possible to revert to the older BRDF in situations where this GGX error is problematic without losing the Energy Conservation Mode or was this never implemented to work with the older BRDF?

[agentdark45]

Well, in case of wallpaint the black wall looks really bad.. But it can be avoided using very high IOR and low reflectivity..

Now I know this isn't how you would like to go about materials, using some weird values, but in that scenario it is avoidable problem.

That example highlights this issue pretty well. I hope this gets fixed promptly.

[Ludvik Koutny]

Well, in case of wallpaint the black wall looks really bad.. But it can be avoided using very high IOR and low reflectivity..

Now I know this isn't how you would like to go about materials, using some weird values, but in that scenario it is avoidable problem.

Nope, that's not a solution. You will completely change characteristics of that material. IOR 100 will mean there will be almost no difference between facing and parallel angle reflectivity. It will look like very dull aluminium, not wall paint.

It's like saying you can workaround refraction bug by using opacity instead of refraction.

[arqrenderz]

Hi Juraj Talcik, are you using very low glossines values on your materials? Becouse you said that you are not getting bad results like rawalanche said and show.
Im afraid to go on 1.0 at the office now and it starts to back fire on me :(

[Ondra]

I just had a discussion with Jaroslav on this topic. Going to the previous "ray flipping" hack is out of question - it just breaks the renderer too much. There are however different possible solutions we will investigate. But they involve some original research, so it will probably take some time to try and implement if we succeed.

[Stan_But]

Hi all!
I have missed the thread about the problem. Good that searching of solution in process

[3dgraphics]

oh, i did some renders with 7.2 and 1.0 to see the difference by this values 0.2 glossiness in a white material!
The new shader in 1.0 looks really bad in comparision with 7.2!
I dont know wich one is phisically more accurate but by 7.2 looks definitly really much better!

I really hope this will be solved soon!

[3dgraphics]

btw, importing one material made with version 7.2 in the one 1.0, this material will continue behaving like
in old model of corona 7.2!! At least by me is so!
So for those kinds of material with less glossiness values u can merge the old one!