Forest Sunrise

Started by sjefen, August 15, 2019, 07:08:33 am

Previous topic - Next topic

Oshyan

Ah, excellent! Definitely more realistic and balanced.

What that video is talking about are "Look Up Tables" (LUTs) for remapping colors in an image. There is a whole extensive amount of info, tools, etc. focused on this, it's quite complicated. But a basic version of LUT support is planned for a future update.

- Oshyan

Matt

August 27, 2019, 01:05:26 am #31 Last Edit: August 27, 2019, 01:11:33 am by Matt
Quote from: sjefen on August 26, 2019, 06:17:36 pmTo something different. I'm not sure if Terragen does this already, but I have a feeling it
doesn't, so can @Matt please take a look at this video and see if there are any possibilities here?

One of the core ideas is to work in linear colour space, not "gamma space". Another of the core ideas is to roll off the highlights with some kind of "tone mapping" that emulates the response that photographic film has to light. Both of these core ideas have been in Terragen since before they became widespread. As Oshyan says, additional LUT support is coming soon.

I wrote more about this here:

https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?msg=240462
Just because milk is white doesn't mean that clouds are made of milk.

DocCharly65

I like the much warmer overall look in "Find Your Way V4 - 03e.jpg" very much!

Tangled-Universe

August 27, 2019, 06:50:27 am #33 Last Edit: August 27, 2019, 07:25:29 am by Tangled-Universe
I like your progression. dof is really subtle!
What were your render settings?

Quote from: sjefen on August 26, 2019, 06:17:36 pmAn update with depth of field and higher resolution.
Also, the first image is straight from TG, while the second has been adjusted in Lightroom.

I also think some of my problems with this scene is that the mud is to dark and I'm trying
to fix it by brightening the shadows and that makes the trees look strange.


To something different. I'm not sure if Terragen does this already, but I have a feeling it
doesn't, so can @Matt please take a look at this video and see if there are any possibilities here?

I like where this discussion is going... I have a lot of interest in this myself lately.
I have seen that Blender video quite a while ago and it made me read quite a bit on it for past couple of months.

I don't know either how wide TG's gamut is. There's a lot of dynamic range in EXR, but colour-wise I'm not sure and that's a different discussion to how many stops of light (the dynamic range I refer to) you can stuff into EXR. Which is insane. However, in sRGB bright saturation colours become solid white much more quickly than when you work in wider gamut.
TG renders linear internally and a colour transform applies gamma so you look at a natural looking image in your renderviewport, because a linear render just looks dull and grey and not how you usually view images.
Blender Filmic is such a view transform.

The linear rendering internally also follows some kind of colourspace definition, dependant on primaries as starting point and probably a lot of other processes afterwards.
Primaries are the conversion of your shader input sRGB's to linear red/green/blue values and they can follow specifications.
Right now, if I'm correct, if you inspect a .tgd the colours of your shader are the median of the RGB linearized value.
So RGB @ 128, 120, 130 has a median of 128 which linearizes to 128/255 = 0.5019.
This hints to me to that TG's renderer uses sRGB primaries.
However, this does not mean that internally colours cannot become richer than sRGB, but I don't know for TG "how far" that goes. Does it extend far beyond sRGB? Do we really have a lot more colours in linear scene space or just a little bit more?
These are retained in your 32-bit float EXR.
To my knowledge, any other output format has its colours and its brightness/saturation clamped to the limits of sRGB.

So it could well be that Blender is also using sRGB primaries and that the Filmic view transform is what it's all about and thus what we perhaps also wish for.
Or perhaps this view transform needs a wider gamut in linear scene space to work correctly. I keep thinking of how colours wash out when they become brighter and how much less that happens when rendering in wide gamut internally, which then would allow for a more correct film emulation view transform.
Anyway, I don't know exactly. I would like to know more too!

bobbystahr

Big like on this one especially Find Your Way V4 - 03e.jpg...well done
something borrowed,
something Blue.
Ring out the Old.
Bring in the New
Bobby Stahr, Paracosmologist

sjefen

Quote from: Tangled-Universe on August 27, 2019, 06:50:27 amI like your progression. dof is really subtle!
What were your render settings?

I think they where something like this:

Micropoly detail: 1
Anti-aliasing: 9

Sampling: Robust adaptive sampler 1/64

Depth of field: 3D DoF

I know I could probably get away with a lower "Micropoly detail" setting, but I just
wanna make sure everything is there. I usually end up rendering a huge image  ;D


- Terje
ArtStation: https://www.artstation.com/royalt

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
32,0 GB RAM
GeForce GTX 1060 6GB

sjefen

Quote from: Tangled-Universe on August 27, 2019, 06:50:27 am
Quote from: sjefen on August 26, 2019, 06:17:36 pmAn update with depth of field and higher resolution.
Also, the first image is straight from TG, while the second has been adjusted in Lightroom.

I also think some of my problems with this scene is that the mud is to dark and I'm trying
to fix it by brightening the shadows and that makes the trees look strange.


To something different. I'm not sure if Terragen does this already, but I have a feeling it
doesn't, so can @Matt please take a look at this video and see if there are any possibilities here?

I like where this discussion is going... I have a lot of interest in this myself lately.
I have seen that Blender video quite a while ago and it made me read quite a bit on it for past couple of months.

I don't know either how wide TG's gamut is. There's a lot of dynamic range in EXR, but colour-wise I'm not sure and that's a different discussion to how many stops of light (the dynamic range I refer to) you can stuff into EXR. Which is insane. However, in sRGB bright saturation colours become solid white much more quickly than when you work in wider gamut.
TG renders linear internally and a colour transform applies gamma so you look at a natural looking image in your renderviewport, because a linear render just looks dull and grey and not how you usually view images.
Blender Filmic is such a view transform.

The linear rendering internally also follows some kind of colourspace definition, dependant on primaries as starting point and probably a lot of other processes afterwards.
Primaries are the conversion of your shader input sRGB's to linear red/green/blue values and they can follow specifications.
Right now, if I'm correct, if you inspect a .tgd the colours of your shader are the median of the RGB linearized value.
So RGB @ 128, 120, 130 has a median of 128 which linearizes to 128/255 = 0.5019.
This hints to me to that TG's renderer uses sRGB primaries.
However, this does not mean that internally colours cannot become richer than sRGB, but I don't know for TG "how far" that goes. Does it extend far beyond sRGB? Do we really have a lot more colours in linear scene space or just a little bit more?
These are retained in your 32-bit float EXR.
To my knowledge, any other output format has its colours and its brightness/saturation clamped to the limits of sRGB.

So it could well be that Blender is also using sRGB primaries and that the Filmic view transform is what it's all about and thus what we perhaps also wish for.
Or perhaps this view transform needs a wider gamut in linear scene space to work correctly. I keep thinking of how colours wash out when they become brighter and how much less that happens when rendering in wide gamut internally, which then would allow for a more correct film emulation view transform.
Anyway, I don't know exactly. I would like to know more too!

This was very technical, but it's very interesting ;D


- Terje
ArtStation: https://www.artstation.com/royalt

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
32,0 GB RAM
GeForce GTX 1060 6GB

Oshyan

Terje, really, everything will be "there" with lower MPD, at least if you are using Path Tracing. I assure you. :D At least use something more like 0.75, you're almost certainly just wasting render time.

- Oshyan

Tangled-Universe

0.75 is pretty high and will indeed cut a lot of render time, also very likely without visible loss of quality. Guess that's why Oshyan came up with that value instead of going from 1 to 0.5, which might be too low for foreground details in some cases, like yours perhaps.
You could perform a "clay render" of your MPD surfaces without the PT but with defer all enabled.
This will allow you to relatively quickly assess the lowest MPD level acceptable for your artistic need.
I wonder if you would even need defer all, since there's only 1 diffuse lambert to be shaded, but at least that setting is closest to rendering with PT without the long waiting times.

Matt

Quote from: Tangled-Universe on August 30, 2019, 06:26:55 amI wonder if you would even need defer all, since there's only 1 diffuse lambert to be shaded, but at least that setting is closest to rendering with PT without the long waiting times.

When most of the ground is covered by ray traced objects, "Defer all shading" usually renders faster than non-deferred. Deferred shading doesn't waste time shading micropolygons that are hidden.
Just because milk is white doesn't mean that clouds are made of milk.

StephB

Very good image, very convincing! Good job! 8)
Photography & Graphic Arts
http://www.stephanebeilliard.com/site/

Tangled-Universe

Quote from: Matt on August 30, 2019, 11:43:40 am
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on August 30, 2019, 06:26:55 amI wonder if you would even need defer all, since there's only 1 diffuse lambert to be shaded, but at least that setting is closest to rendering with PT without the long waiting times.

When most of the ground is covered by ray traced objects, "Defer all shading" usually renders faster than non-deferred. Deferred shading doesn't waste time shading micropolygons that are hidden.
Ah yes, forgot about that, thanks!

sjefen

Thanks guys. I'll try your suggestions.

I also have some questions regarding 360 renders, or spherical renders.

I tried rendering this scene as a spherical image and made it work on Facebook. It was rendered out in 4K, but on Facebook it's very blurry. I'm not sure if that's cause of Facebook's compression, or if it's cause I need to render at a much higher resolution when doing spherical renders. Anyone know this?

I also want to have one 360 version for YouTube, but I'm not sure how to do that. It can be done if I use Photoshop, but I don't have Photoshop. Does anyone know how to do this?


- Terje
ArtStation: https://www.artstation.com/royalt

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
32,0 GB RAM
GeForce GTX 1060 6GB