[REQ] Tracing priority

Kram1032 · Post by **Kram1032** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 11:17 pm

hum... but indigo starts tracing a ray from the camera, as far as I know, so, if you say indigo "shoot a ray in that direction", the ray gets seen for (with bidir) close to 100% - it tries to find a lightsource and bounces around, before. that's the way, how it gets it's colour

jukka · Post by **jukka** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:05 am

I would like to suggest a new "weight" item for the material that would simply tell indigo how many samples per pass to calculate when it hits that specific material (I guess it would be meaningful for directly visible objects or specular reflection, not as much for diffuse reflection). I think that it would be pretty trivial to implement using only integer values for this parameter.

This method would help with reflections and refractions because you wouldn't have to define separate "regions of preference" for the reflection/refraction and object itself. It would also help if you have many objects using the same SSS material, for instance. Such a parameter could also be added to objects, so if you had an object that's very important you could boost its weight, and if that object used a material with a higher sampling weight, the total number of samples would be the product of those two weights. That would allow for pretty flexible tweaking of the tracing priorities IMHO.

BbB · Post by **BbB** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:49 am

I'm not sure I'm too hot on aeronoise. It seems like the typical "great" idea that turns out to be useless in practice. The samples I've seen show very clear "stamp" marks around the highlighted area, which I guess could be difficult to get rid of unless you let the image render forever, which kinds of, uh, defeat the purpose of the whole thing. Maybe priorities assigned to specific objects would be better...

CTZn · Post by **CTZn** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 4:35 am

I'd prefer a solution where geometries (or materials, or possibly both) are marked as slower to converge before rendering, like precedence for sss

=

instead of a bounding box I suggested to name objects that should have a higher priority.

=

Why not just say: "object X should receive more rays"?

=

I would like to suggest a new "weight" item for the material that would simply tell indigo how many samples per pass to calculate when it hits that specific material

...

Concentrate your mind, ppl, save glucose !

Kram1032 · Post by **Kram1032** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 4:53 am

lol, yeah

besides that, there where two more suggestions (if I didn't miss any)

the "target portal mesh" (CoolColJ)
and the highly complicated "Forumlasolution" (me)

BbB · Post by **BbB** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 7:36 am

Experience shows that, if repeated often enough, aspirations become reality.

CTZn · Post by **CTZn** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 8:25 am

thats right, but I felt the thread was becoming a bit confuse while the ideas where similar.

Yep kram you missed zsouthboy's suggestion, using a bitmap mask

zsouthboy · Post by **zsouthboy** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 11:31 am

Note that my recommendation is simply Fryrender's solution (which marks the areas in the same way), except with an extra step, as I know how much Ono loves GUI programming.

psor · Post by **psor** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:28 pm

*tadaaaa*

Erm, ... sorry to bump in here, but AFAIK fryrenders Aeronoise is not a
solution for this problem. It is intended to get a better preview of diff.
areas in the scene, not to clean noise for a final image.

... just my two cents. ;o))

take care
psor

zsouthboy · Post by **zsouthboy** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 11:50 pm

I disagree with your (and others') assessment.

It's perfectly useable.

If you're seeing "stamp marks" because of the different in noise levels, you're not allowing the rest of the non-aeronoise'd scene to converge long enough.

psor · Post by **psor** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 12:54 am

@zsouthboy

I know what you're talking about, but from my POV it would be not very good
for the workflow, to sit the whole time in front of the renderings till disabling
Aeronoise and let the image converge ... just my 2 cents. ;o))

take care
psor

oogsnoepje · Post by **oogsnoepje** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 2:26 am

Well, it would get you many nights full of joy. Wouldn't that be worth it?

CTZn wrote:Concentrate your mind, ppl, save glucose !

I'm sorry, my mind was noisy at that time, should have let the reply clear up a bit longer

CTZn · Post by **CTZn** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:29 am

Look mate, I am sorry you took my words that seriously

furthermore you wrote:

(probably the same as mentioned above but I didn't read the linked topic)

so you were not the less aware here. Now I feel confuse. Before i make a real reproach, muuuch more has to be done ! I've got a kind of humour that most ppl take seriously, I should watch this...

Cheers !

Kram1032 · Post by **Kram1032** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:39 am

- I guess, if we'd hear your voice, that wouldn't be a problem

Forums are very critical for humor

but if you add a [joke] tag, it's loosing it's funniness

CTZn · Post by **CTZn** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:06 am

Kram1032 wrote: - I guess, if we'd hear your voice, that wouldn't be a problem

Forums are very critical for humor
but if you add a [joke] tag, it's loosing it's funniness

Man, even in real life. People is more often flabbergasted than amused... because they are affraid i'd be serious

The fact is that I have no problem with self-derision... it's an institution for me, quite healthy

[REQ] Tracing priority

Who is online