As in another thread Oshyan already said this setting can be good for some scenes and not so good for others.
I made many different renders with this basic object to see how different it can get.
In some renders i used different GI cache details too.
This is not a scientific test.
As i said only to see that you can get many different lighted scenes with objects.
The same is probably true for standard landscape scenes.
I for one think that an Occlusion weight between 0.1 and 0.25 or so is more realistic for objects.
But that is very subjective probably.
The second from the last renders (07) is with default and the last (08) with only 0.25 Occlusion weight.
I have one question.
If you look at the images fast and sequentially you will see that the wall straight ahead is blotchy.
Not only near the edges even in the far side too. To show this better i used PNG files.
How can we get rid of those blotches ?
The last 3 images.
Thank you Kadri. This is more helpful for me than you may guess.
Probably add the images to the wikki page for GISD too.
Thanks Michael :)
But as i said there were some small different settings that i don't remember much now (like cache detail and blur radius) .
Thus it is better seen as i said that you can get different views and not seen as strictly for every feature difference only.
But i think those settings haven't much of an impact (small at least) to the renders here.
The test scene if you want to test it yourself.
I agree that .02 looks best (the last one). Can you post all relative settings for that one? I think that would be the best starting place for most of my models.
The most important setting is in the image name of the files Michael.
The others i don't remember.
I saved only one instance of the file and that is the one i posted above already.
I've found Ambient Occlusion to be most impressive/useful where there is displacement and/or bump maps involved.
In uneven places like ground and-or like you said displacement and-or maps it might be good.
Probably this is one of the settings to remember scene by scene basis mostly.
It might be well to distinguish between selecting the Ambient Occlusion method inside the GI Surface Detail settings versus using an Environmental Light which uses Ambient Occlusion. Renders have been set up using more than one Environmental Light, using both Global Illumination and also using Ambient Occlusion, with levels adjusted to taste.
For example I refer to Marcos Silveira's beautiful Wuhen Coast -----> http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,14937.msg145464.html#msg145464 (http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,14937.msg145464.html#msg145464)
The file for that render is here -----------> http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,14961.msg145720.html#msg145720 (http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,14961.msg145720.html#msg145720)
(http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=14937.0;attach=38913;image)
Yes many options to choose from.
I generally set GI and AO in the Lighting Tab as well as in the GI off the Render Tab...in the lighting tab you have control of the colour which an be a make or break thing, but that Bounce setting and the Occlusion slider are downright dangerous used indiscreetly.
Yes and Terragen does have for me a kinda experimental nature too :)
So no harm to test many different things, if you have time especially.
Quote from: Kadri on April 20, 2014, 12:07:23 AM
Yes and Terragen does have for me a kinda experimental nature too :)
So no harm to test many different things, if you have time especially.
Indeed, lately I've been fixated on Stained Glass but fear it's not doable how I want till we get full grayscale transparency. In Imagine3D we had the ability to use a colour map for everything but alpha and the filter part worked a treat for Stained Glass...I figure I can get closer to that with grayscale transparency. I like to really beat a thing to either life or death before I move on, heh heh heh.
The blotchiness can probably be fixed with increased GI Sample Quality and/or Cache Detail.
- Oshyan
Interesting test, Kadri. Matt and Jo are probably working hard to improve GISD. Basically it's a treat, but like said here, you have to use it prudently. You can see the other issue addressed as well, the dotted black line on the edges of objects. That should go in the end, I hope they're able to do so.
Quote from: bobbystahr on April 20, 2014, 01:25:32 AM
Indeed, lately I've been fixated on Stained Glass but fear it's not doable how I want till we get full grayscale transparency....
It is usable but we need better transparency for sure.
I haven't tried that but shouldn't that be possible in some way anyway now?
You know more then us Ulco ;)
So far i know GI kinda solutions does have those kind of problems in other software too.
Mostly long render times are the solution as it looks.
What Matt and Jo is trying hard is probably how to do this in a reasonable render time without much errors.
Osyhan i thought about that but render times made me afraid to try and wanted to test only the options you would say.
I am rendering now with higher setting.
I begun with very high numbers ( GI cache detail 8, GI sample quality 8 ) just to be sure and will go lower from there.
Just the GI pass takes on this 1280x1000 more then 20 minutes with this setting.
Don't know how many polygons your object has,but I would test it
with a higher polycount,too.Just to compare the blotchiness of the
results.If there is no difference you can at least exclude the polycount
being a cause.
Yep that is one of the things i want to try too.
Every wall is only one big polygon.
Looks like by going high to "GI cache detail" 8 and "GI sample quality" 8 i found the setting that in this situation got rid of the blotches.
By using values 6, 6 the blotches could still be seen.
I am trying with a value of 6 on two of them with GI blur radius 16 ones more to see what happens.
I stopped the render because the blotches are still there.
By the way, i saved as an EXR too to see if there was any difference but it had the same blotches (with 6,6).
This test is kinda an extreme situation.
With a texture on the wall and displacements it should be barely noticeable i think.
Maybe even with lesser numbers.
And with an animation the interpolation would help too probably.
J meyer i tried it with a very high poly object too but there was no difference.
This is so far i will test it if there aren't other suggestions guys.
Hope it helps a little more to understand some of those settings .
Quote from: Kadri on April 20, 2014, 01:07:39 PM
J meyer i tried it with a very high poly object too but there was no difference.
This is so far i will test it if there aren't other suggestions guys.
Hope it helps a little more to understand some of those settings .
Try it with the Rock tgo with it a fair bit of PF displacements to see the strength of the effect....
I tried it with this kind object because on such an object it might be much harder to see.
Quote from: Kadri on April 20, 2014, 03:47:08 PM
I tried it with this kind object because on such an object it might be much harder to see.
The reason I suggested this approach is I viewed a video tute on Ambient Occlusion by I think Oshyan that got me insipired to play around with the setting.
Dunno where it was as I dl'd it and found it on my HDD....