with some bloom and glare it has a similar feel to the photo
CoolColJ's test pics thread
render at 7300 samples, after many hours, and it's still adding more and more stuff...nowhere near finished yet. I'm not sure if these are caustics anymore...
with some bloom and glare it has a similar feel to the photo
with some bloom and glare it has a similar feel to the photo
- Attachments
-
- webPICT1679water_2.JPG (132.27 KiB) Viewed 3625 times
-
- with bloom and glare
- CCJ_WaterTest_MNCR50000_7300samples_BloomGlare.JPG (94.8 KiB) Viewed 3625 times
-
- CCJ_WaterTest_MNCR50000_7300samples.JPG (93.88 KiB) Viewed 3625 times
well CoolColJ, as for now this scene is impossible to render correctly. if a scene doesnt look right with that many spp i wont become any better - point.
and stressing ono to optimize it is senseless too - i'm sure he read your previous posts and is aware of that issue himself (and he's visiting ian's forum also).
and stressing ono to optimize it is senseless too - i'm sure he read your previous posts and is aware of that issue himself (and he's visiting ian's forum also).
I estimate it might look right at around 21000 samples 
I did a test render of this scene at 160x120 up to 12,000 samples and it only showed some big white dots on the water, which at that resolution is hard to tell
indirectly seen caustics are slow at the best of times, I probably should have just made a small bucket of water...
How they got underwater caustics to show so quickly and cleanly in the original MLT paper with the computers they had back then is beyond me
http://graphics.stanford.edu/papers/metro/
2.5 hours 800x500 100 mutations per pixel with 190mhz MIPS R1000 Processor 10 years ago!
There must be something missing in the MLT puzzle

I did a test render of this scene at 160x120 up to 12,000 samples and it only showed some big white dots on the water, which at that resolution is hard to tell
indirectly seen caustics are slow at the best of times, I probably should have just made a small bucket of water...
How they got underwater caustics to show so quickly and cleanly in the original MLT paper with the computers they had back then is beyond me
http://graphics.stanford.edu/papers/metro/
2.5 hours 800x500 100 mutations per pixel with 190mhz MIPS R1000 Processor 10 years ago!
There must be something missing in the MLT puzzle

a large 6m light nearby sorta works, but doesn't look like the Sun though. Lights seem to have some falloff etc and well you don't get the sky
Big lights also don't generate the caustics all that well
Blackbody lights are bright as hell! I had to use only 2 watt and efficacy of 1!
Otherwise the RGB background colour gets blacked out and the textures get washed out. Background colour has no gain though in Cinidgo, should it?
And I get these shading errors on the cylinders with lights, even though they are not that low poly and have smoothing on. You can see the segments! Not a problem with Sun/Sky, so don't they shade properly with lights?
Big lights also don't generate the caustics all that well
Blackbody lights are bright as hell! I had to use only 2 watt and efficacy of 1!
Otherwise the RGB background colour gets blacked out and the textures get washed out. Background colour has no gain though in Cinidgo, should it?
And I get these shading errors on the cylinders with lights, even though they are not that low poly and have smoothing on. You can see the segments! Not a problem with Sun/Sky, so don't they shade properly with lights?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 104 guests
