Morning Glory *updated* with improved rayrtace image

Arctorus · October 07, 2009, 08:14:05 PM

This is using the Golden Forest tutorial, Walli's Pines and grasses.
Hope you like it.
[attachthumb=#]

Mike

Arctorus · October 07, 2009, 08:19:03 PM

and here is the same thing with raytraced shadows on, it took a lot of tweaking to get this looking like the first image and a render time of about nine hours. I'm not sure I like it as much as the first, what do you guys think?

[attachthumb=#]

Mike

choronr · October 07, 2009, 09:31:31 PM

I like the first one much better. It looks like you'll need more atmo and cloud sample to get rid of the graininess if you plan on reworking the one with the traced rays. I just finished the same tutorial and posted an image using it. I like the technique which I plan on using for other projects.

You did a fine job on this work. Looking forward

RArcher · October 07, 2009, 10:08:16 PM

Very nice. The rays would look fantastic with a big increase in the atmosphere samples.

Henry Blewer · October 08, 2009, 12:05:22 AM

You have done a great job with both. Ryan is right about the rays needing more atmosphere samples. If you used 64, I would try 128 samples. A little dust would be ok, but the rays look like they are shining through smoke now.

efflux · October 08, 2009, 01:02:15 PM

Very nice. I like the golden colouring. Once again though, graininess in atmosphere.

Arctorus · October 08, 2009, 07:23:37 PM

Thanks for all the comments guys. In the raytraced image atmo samples were at 256 and this was only a very slight improvement over an earlier render with 128 samples, increasing further will probably not improve it any more.

Arctorus · October 11, 2009, 05:55:18 PM

Here is a slightly improved raytraced image. For those who need to know these are the stats -Detail -1, AA - 6, GI - 2/4/8, 256 atmo samples, 128 cloud samples, Render time 18hrs 42min.
I think this is about as good as it's going to get.

[attachthumb=#]

Mike

Henry Blewer · October 12, 2009, 09:04:00 AM

It still looks a little grainy, but more like dust. I think it works well with the lighting.

Tangled-Universe · October 12, 2009, 11:24:39 AM

Looks good so far!

The grain is not from the atmosphere but from the clouds.
256 samples for atmosphere is much, but you shouldn't go much lower probably.

128 cloud samples? Says "nothing"...the detail-value is what's important, so what's that?
For a render like this you'd need detail values >1. Maybe even something around 3.
Difficult to say though, since it depends on density and depth of the cloud (play around with these and you'll understand why samples aren't key for quality, but detail-setting is).

I'd suggest to reduce the atmo-samples to ~192 and increase the quality of your cloudlayer by 50% at least. Do a crop render and keep increasing if necessary.

Cheers,
Martin

reck · October 12, 2009, 04:04:33 PM

TU, just so i'm clear. When you mention the detail value are you talking about Renderers tab -> Quality -> Detail setting?

I ask because the most i've gone with this setting is 1, normally I leave it at 0.8 or 0.9. I couldn't imagine going to 3. Can you really tell a difference once you go over 1?

If your talking about another details setting can you tell me which one please?

Cheers

Gannaingh · October 12, 2009, 05:26:31 PM

TU is refering to the qualty tab in the cloud layer. It should give you an option to change the cloud's samples and overall quality independently. TU is suggesting that you put the quality slider in that tab up to 3, not you overall render quality.

Arctorus · October 12, 2009, 05:57:41 PM

Thanks for the comments, I've just checked and cloud quality is 3.17

PG · October 12, 2009, 06:49:37 PM

that's high.

I don't think TG2s engine is capable of completely eliminating noise with this level of light intensity without massive samples though. Could try increasing sample jitter.

reck · October 13, 2009, 04:36:41 PM

Quote from: darthvader1 on October 12, 2009, 05:26:31 PM
TU is refering to the qualty tab in the cloud layer. It should give you an option to change the cloud's samples and overall quality independently. TU is suggesting that you put the quality slider in that tab up to 3, not you overall render quality.

Ah the quality setting, lol I was looking everywhere for a detail setting.

But the quality setting just increases the samples right, nothing more? So if I move the quality slider all the way to the right and it sets the samples to 32, there would be no difference to the final image if I left the quality setting alone and just typed 32 in the samples box, is this right?