It needs a little bit of work...
STUNNING!!! 8)
Guess u will take out some of the grainy stuff right?
Extraordinary lighting. Wow is the word!
Thanks, guys.
You know, for every single image I post, I get complaints on the noise. What's the best way to get rid of that? I got detail at 0.8, AA at 5. I bump the quality on the atmosphere nodes to almost the highest. Should I put it at the absolute highest?
What setting do you have for your atmosphere samples? Sometimes with "fog" as you have it is hard to get rid of. Great image............ ;D
Beautiful. Incredible lightning. Definitively a masterpiece
David
Quote from: Upon Infinity on September 28, 2015, 03:22:06 AM
Thanks, guys.
You know, for every single image I post, I get complaints on the noise. What's the best way to get rid of that? I got detail at 0.8, AA at 5. I bump the quality on the atmosphere nodes to almost the highest. Should I put it at the absolute highest?
It can be caused by the atmo samples or he cloud samples and quality. I think if your atmo samples are high and it is still grainy then it must be the clouds. I would try to crank up the cloud quality bit by bit. Standard clouds setting starts around 0.2/0.3. In your case I would start the testing with 0.5/0.6 and go up from there.
All cloud layers are at 0.8 or higher. Atmo samples are at 58.
Really nice. Backlighting is fantastic.
What is your haze setting in Atmo?
Quote from: Upon Infinity on September 28, 2015, 04:41:11 AM
All cloud layers are at 0.8 or higher. Atmo samples are at 58.
That can be higher in your case. Once in a dark pix I went up to 120 to handle the grain.
What are your cloud settings...............most detail? And I would take your cloud quality to 1, do a crop of your noisiest area and go from there. I have also had atmo samples up to 128 to get rid of noise.............can be really slow sometimes. ;D
Perhaps it's not the atmo, but the low cloud layer, as this is quite close to the camera. Higher AA will also help.
Very nice lighting and atmosphere.
Great lighting on this.
Atmosphere 64, All cloud layers a minimum of Quality 1, Detail 1, AA 16. I often use something like that on final renders. If that leaves noise, I quit messing around and check the Defer Atmo box, and just go away for a couple days :)
I figure for a final image that might be around for years, extra render time like 12 or 24 hours is quite trivial.
Extraordinary! Great!
Everything looks quite *sharp* to me. There is "noise" (or at least sharpness) even on the foreground grass. So my first question, rather than about render settings, is what - if anything - you did for post processing? Any sharpening? Or did you use a "sharp" AA filter? I would definitely use higher AA than 5, too. AA8 or so for good vegetation. But if you're not using Defer Atmo (and I am not necessarily recommending that you do), then this won't improve your cloud/atmo noise. However to my eye that noise is not necessarily that obvious, or at least it might not be if the sharpening that I suspect is happening were reduced or eliminated.
- Oshyan
Quote from: Oshyan on September 28, 2015, 07:23:02 PM
Everything looks quite *sharp* to me. There is "noise" (or at least sharpness) even on the foreground grass. So my first question, rather than about render settings, is what - if anything - you did for post processing? Any sharpening? Or did you use a "sharp" AA filter? I would definitely use higher AA than 5, too. AA8 or so for good vegetation. But if you're not using Defer Atmo (and I am not necessarily recommending that you do), then this won't improve your cloud/atmo noise. However to my eye that noise is not necessarily that obvious, or at least it might not be if the sharpening that I suspect is happening were reduced or eliminated.
- Oshyan
Yes, I don't consider the noise that big a deal on my end. Perhaps the uploading compression is making it worse. But I do get complaints on every image I post for noise. Sometimes, it's just low quality settings, as I have *yet* to post a single final render for any of my images. Or, perhaps, it's always the same person who's making noise about noise. :P
In any event, I use defer atmo as a default. And no, no post sharpening was done, although I did some minor levels / colour changes in post. And just the standard box AA filter.
EDIT: Posted new version. New version is still using old quality values.
Very nice stuff!
fantastic vista :)
Yes, again a super image, with the promise of distant high ground, terrific.
Yes, a lovely image. Strange, I would swear there was post sharpening. Maybe it's the contrast. Or low-ish AA. A great scene though.
- Oshyan
The box filter might have something to do with it, at least in the vegetation. I would say the box filter is the worst of the available options. I like the lighting here.
Matt
Quote from: Matt on September 30, 2015, 10:56:52 PM
The box filter might have something to do with it, at least in the vegetation. I would say the box filter is the worst of the available options. I like the lighting here.
Matt
Which would be best, in your opinion? Isn't box the default? I hardly ever change that particular setting except once or twice before to experiment.
Going to try one more after this with the suggested settings.
The default is Narrow Cubic. If you loaded a project saved in one of the early tech previews then it would inherit Box, but for all new render nodes it defaults to Narrow Cubic. That's not a great choice either, but it renders faster than most of the others and it is a compromise between the ragged sharpness of Box and the smoothness of Cubic B-Spline, Mitchell-Netravali or Catmull-Rom.
For the best results, choose one of these (ordered from softest to sharpest):
Cubic B-Spline
Mitchell-Netravali
Catmull-Rom
My favourite is Mitchell-Netravali. Cubic B-Spline tends to look a bit blurry, but I sometimes use this for renders in production, especially if I'm outputting alpha channels because it's only one out of these three that doesn't sometimes produce negative values. If you want a sharper, crisper look, go for Catmull-Rom. Mitchell-Netravali is a good compromise between those two.
Oshyan rendered some tests here.
http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=5142.msg53401#msg53401
Matt
Quote from: Matt on October 01, 2015, 01:17:37 AM
If you loaded a project saved in one of the early tech previews then it would inherit Box
Yeah, all of my scenes are derived from scenes created with the TG2 Technology Preview (weren't those the days? ;)). Even though these scenes weren't created back then, the scenes they are derived from were. I still have the Quick Render node embedded in them. ;D Not sure why you took that away. Doing that, helps gives my scenes some general consistency, since they're all part of the same 'world'. Also, it's how long I've been working on this project... ::)
I mostly use Mitchell-Netravali in all of my renders and it seems to work quite well.
Okay, used the Mitchell-Netravali AA filter. Increased atmo samples to 75. And increased the clouds quality to 1. Seems to be no more noise. On to the next scene...
Beautifull !!!
Wonderful result :D
Looks great.
Very nice indeed. The slightly softer pixel filter makes a notable difference (and an improvement) to my eye. :)
- Oshyan
Looks really good..............nice render. The lighting is great. ;D
I likes. :)
Terrific!
Wow, that's really beautiful! Great lighting.
Has a major coolness factor to it.