Hard Shadows through The Glass Bottle....

[marasek]

Hi all,

Im new here and new to indigo renderer, hope to find help with my problem.

Im getting hard shadows when render glass bottle I think ive done everything and tried all the ways but still no effect that im looking for, see te image below thats my render in indigo:

http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/382/ ... 1314sa.png

i like the coustics but dont like that hard shadows, ive rendered same scene in maxwell render to compare so u can see difference here:

http://img805.imageshack.us/img805/2050 ... sl1442.png

maxwell has much softer shadows why i can't get them in indigo?

any ideas?

Many thanks.

[OnoSendai]

You just need a larger light source

[marasek]

I know it already
But the thing is ive tried larger light source and problem stay the same and second thing is that i dont want to use larger light because i need that kind of look wich u can see on pics.

But thanks anyway for trying to help.

Cheers.

Any other ideas?

[FakeShamus]

Ono gave you the answer - two quick example renders attached.

edit: just realized, maybe you are misunderstanding "larger" as "brighter" - you need to make your light object physically larger in scale to get the softer shadows. brightness stays the same.

[marasek]

Yes I did misunderstand but even then when I used larger scale light the shadows seems to stay a bit to dark and deep when they should be more transparent in my opinion compare to real world, correct me maybe Im wrong...

But I did not mention that Im using C4D and I used point light to light the scene and with point light Ive change cone angle much wider and unfortunately the shadows dont get softer feel at all...

I dont know, maybe it dos not work with cinema lights, it works with light objects well, they are much softer but not much transparent, is there any solution for this?

Many thanks for help

[Zom-B]

But I did not mention that Im using C4D and I used point light to light the scene and with point light Ive change cone angle much wider and unfortunately the shadows dont get softer feel at all...

The C4D exporter only does basic transition from C4D Lightsources to Indigo ones. Actually the exporter creates a mesh and puts a emitter material on it!
Working in Indigo you should adapt the workflow to create a emitter mesh and put a material on that, its the way to have full control of every aspect of the output

I dont know, maybe it dos not work with cinema lights, it works with light objects well, they are much softer but not much transparent, is there any solution for this?

I would suggest you also smooth your mesh further, to prevent (subtle) edges that are "normal-smothed" on the surface, but maybe still relevant for interaction with light (I'm not sure about that at all!?!). Using the SubDiv tag of Indigo with smoothing turned on will do the job

[pixie]

Yes I did misunderstand but even then when I used larger scale light the shadows seems to stay a bit to dark and deep when they should be more transparent in my opinion compare to real world, correct me maybe Im wrong...

But I did not mention that Im using C4D and I used point light to light the scene and with point light Ive change cone angle much wider and unfortunately the shadows dont get softer feel at all...

I dont know, maybe it dos not work with cinema lights, it works with light objects well, they are much softer but not much transparent, is there any solution for this?

Many thanks for help

Use two area lights, one for the caustics and other bigger as fill light.
Here you have the c4d file and the indigo one

[marasek]

[/quote]

Use two area lights, one for the caustics and other bigger as fill light.
Here you have the c4d file and the indigo one[/quote]

Its some kind of solution but I would like to keep my scene dark parts as they are on original photo by using area light I'll light my all scene what I try to avoid...
here is my render with softer shadow:
http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/738/sh ... n300sa.png

compare to what was before its much better:)
But still one problem occur, transparency and keeping scene dark as it is...

here is my packed scene maybe someone can try to solve this problem...
http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/214/ ... epack.jpeg [change the extension to correct one .pigs, I needed to change it otherwise could not upload on imageshock ]

Thanks a lot for all your help

[marasek]

Yes I did misunderstand but even then when I used larger scale light the shadows seems to stay a bit to dark and deep when they should be more transparent in my opinion compare to real world, correct me maybe Im wrong...

But I did not mention that Im using C4D and I used point light to light the scene and with point light Ive change cone angle much wider and unfortunately the shadows dont get softer feel at all...

I dont know, maybe it dos not work with cinema lights, it works with light objects well, they are much softer but not much transparent, is there any solution for this?

Many thanks for help

Use two area lights, one for the caustics and other bigger as fill light.
Here you have the c4d file and the indigo one

Ive tried one more time your solution and seems to be fine but I get some strange artifacts:
http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/7443/i ... 3340sa.png

Any ideas??

Thanks!

[marasek]

Finaly I end up with this:

http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/2717 ... sample.png

Its kind of effect what I was looking for except area light reflection but I think that is something I have to live with, or maybe is there other solutions, If you know any please let me know

Many thanks for all help!

Cheers!

[Headroom]

Any form of caustics will require "Bidirectional with MLT" as Render mode. Not sure if it's called the same way in Cindigo (I use Blender) but that's the way its called in the Indigo UI.

The next thing you can try is to increase the supersampling factor from the default 2 to 3 or 4. The artifacts "fireflies" may just be unresolved caustics and will vanish over time.

[CTZn]

Changing the cone angle does not change the punctual nature of the light source. The most typical light source in Indigo is a planar surface.

Punctual lights and Single Path Tracing together can often lead to such artifacts. What Headroom says.

The depth of shadows is, beyond lighting, a matter of tonemapping.

You will find that "realistic" tonemapping methods, wich the Reinhard method is not really, will require you to manage the emission powers differently: if your render turns out pitch black when you change from Reinhard method to the linear or camera methods, this only means that the light power used was in fact negligeable to a human eye.

The Reinhard method is usefull when using arbitrary light powers, but these become an issue when the sunsky system is introduced, notably.

[marasek]

Any form of caustics will require "Bidirectional with MLT" as Render mode. Not sure if it's called the same way in Cindigo (I use Blender) but that's the way its called in the Indigo UI.

The next thing you can try is to increase the supersampling factor from the default 2 to 3 or 4. The artifacts "fireflies" may just be unresolved caustics and will vanish over time.

I used Bidirectional with MLT with supersampling 10 and yes name is the same for it in cindigo
For tonemapping Ive used camera mode so I think that my last render http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/2717 ... sample.png its all I can do with that kind of scene.

One more time thanks for help.

[StompinTom]

Any form of caustics will require "Bidirectional with MLT" as Render mode. Not sure if it's called the same way in Cindigo (I use Blender) but that's the way its called in the Indigo UI.

The next thing you can try is to increase the supersampling factor from the default 2 to 3 or 4. The artifacts "fireflies" may just be unresolved caustics and will vanish over time.

I used Bidirectional with MLT with supersampling 10 and yes name is the same for it in cindigo
For tonemapping Ive used camera mode so I think that my last render http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/2717 ... sample.png its all I can do with that kind of scene.

One more time thanks for help.

Ok, your supersampling is excessive. The highest I've ever had to go is MAYBE 5, for small images with lots of noise. My standard is 3, or 2 if it's a very high resolution (blown up) image.

[CTZn]

Well, I think we have covered your concern indeed in this thread.

One last tip: keep a small gap between objects and the surfaces they are lying onto; specially glass objects, as otherwise the hard surface may take over the glass volume and break its shading somewhat.

At least one fifth of a millimeter (0.2mm), there's nothing wrong with slightly higher values.