WinOsi Caustic Test Scene

[Zom-B]

To get some caustics in Indigo 0.6 just disable BiDir

Ok, just forget what I said... in this scenario, plugin BiDir off just get some strange results...

I just tried to this Scene too, but my results look somehow different (v0.6),
the caustics are arranged in lines, and the left sphere seems smoothed,
but I told it not to smooth using some xml arguments...


(rendered for 4h and 1350 muts per pixel)


I used a Phong material fresnel 1, exponent 100.000 as mirror material,
russian_roulette_live_prob is at 0.999, and max_depth at 100000 to have
some long time bouncing rays for nice caustics (am I right with this thought???)


BTW:
manitwo... what did you done with the back part of your scene,
looks like a secret Door just opened after you hit "the great Render button"

I uploaded the C4D Scene (fully tagged for Indigo 0.6 Export)
I only raised the mirror phong exponent to 100.000 and Black Body gain to 20.000 by hand
(Exporter is clamped to lower values )

[Kram1032]

Uhm...
How can I get the faceted Ball staying faceted?
Is there any way to use blender-exporter for this?

[manitwo]

hi zomb

good render, a bit unsharp maybe, but very clean after 4h.
does 100.000 mean 100 or 100000? (100 would be too less)
why did you raise the blackbody gain? it doesnt matter if you enable reinhard tonemapping, or?

BTW:
manitwo... what did you done with the back part of your scene,
looks like a secret Door just opened after you hit "the great Render button"

sorry i fell stupid now what do you mean?

[IanT]

I used a Phong material fresnel 1, exponent 100.000 as mirror material,
russian_roulette_live_prob is at 0.999, and max_depth at 100000 to have
some long time bouncing rays for nice caustics (am I right with this thought???)

For a "true" comparison with other renderers, the material on the reflective spheres should be 100% specular (e.g. a non-transmitting dielectric with the IOR winched up for perfect mirror reflection) rather than a phong-based material (although I don't know if Indigo turns this material internally into specular with such a high exponent).

Ian.

[Zom-B]

Uhm...
How can I get the faceted Ball staying faceted?
Is there any way to use blender-exporter for this?

I did it by hand, using <normal_smoothing>false</normal_smoothing> for the model.

hi zomb

good render, a bit unsharp maybe, but very clean after 4h.
does 100.000 mean 100 or 100000? (100 would be too less)
why did you raise the blackbody gain? it doesnt matter if you enable reinhard tonemapping, or?

BTW:
manitwo... what did you done with the back part of your scene,
looks like a secret Door just opened after you hit "the great Render button"

sorry i fell stupid now what do you mean?

100.000 menas 100000 ^^, I pushed the Black Body gain to get a usable untonemapped.exr, because else its no color information even in this 32bit image... I simply believe (maybe I'm wrong) that even if Indigo work internal in a higher Bitrate, its better to sinc lightning to 8bit visibility, so nothing is clamped...

LOL... now I see that the pic I talk about is the one for RADIUM!
Please finally insert your Indigo Images, now I recognized I can't see them either...

For a "true" comparison with other renderers, the material on the reflective spheres should be 100% specular (e.g. a non-transmitting dielectric with the IOR winched up for perfect mirror reflection) rather than a phong-based material (although I don't know if Indigo turns this material internally into specular with such a high exponent).

Ian.

Yes I tried a specular material, but it turns totally black
perhaps because i said it shouldn't be transparent, but if its a total mirror
it should be not relevant...
I try it soon!

[manitwo]

hmm ... why do nobody see the indigo images??? strange.
updated with an newer one.
(hope you guys will see it this time) look at the first page!
as suggested from ianT i used this code for the chrome parts:
(perhaps i set the ior too low cause the material is a bit dark now)

Code: Select all

    <material>
        <name>mirror</name>
        <specular>
            <ior>10</ior>
            <cauchy_b_coeff>0</cauchy_b_coeff>
            <rgb_absorptivity>0 0 0</rgb_absorptivity>
            <transparent>false</transparent>
        </specular>
    </material>

I think the new one is really good for only 500 mutations per pixel.

[kepler]

manitwo i can't see the indigo 0.7 image (the last one)

[CTZn]

I can see the image since the beginning, some can't... Maybe need a conversion ?

By the way what's the best for mirrors ? phong or specular ? Isn't a non transparent specular supposed to be a perfect mirror ? How comes it still need a medium declaration while no light can pass through ? Does despite all ior still have an impact on specularity, that's why, and is 10 meaning something anyway for an ior ?

Lol so many questions

[IanT]

Yes, IOR should have an effect on dielectric reflection as well as transmission... setting a normal reflectance of 1 (or setting a very high IOR of, say, 200) should result in perfect reflection at all angles.

A phong material with very very high exponent should behave the same as a perfect mirror, all other things being equal (IOR calculations etc.) but, depending on the exact rendering algorithm, may end up with better or worse mutation performance depending on how it's treated internally. Obviously I can't speak for Indigo here because I've not seen the code...

Ian.

[CTZn]

So one material may be better than the other for mirrors, that's interesting.

Thank you.

[manitwo]

manitwo i can't see the indigo 0.7 image (the last one)

somebody know a good image-hoster (not imageshack)?

[CTZn]

http://photobucket.com they say.

[manitwo]

thank you - 0.7 indigo image now hosted by photobucket

[kepler]

thank you - 0.7 indigo image now hosted by photobucket

Thank you very much, now I can see it
Seems that Imageshack doesn't work well anymore...

[Kram1032]

@ZomB:
thx^^

@maintwo:
I also haven't been able, to see indigo v0.7.
Now, I am. Thx.
You expected this kinda artistic result? Why? Is v0.7 THAT different? Can you "fix" it?