For some reason I find water's volume density function to look more convincing and realistic in the standard renderer compared to path-tracing. >:(
When rendering through the standard renderer, shadow edges on the water are blurry and diverse. As they should be when cast onto a particle-rich liquid. However, when path-tracing with the same volumetric function applied, they are straight as if cast onto a metal plate. ::) Not sure what to make out of it.
Can you show examples?
The example as such is in the form of my contest entry, so I'd rather withhold it until sub-board is made. It's problematic, because the render as a whole could benefit from PT, but dust particles in the water are just "boring" when pt-ed. Unfortunately, the sample renders I have just attempted don't quite show what I mean. ::) I guess we could continue this discussion later. Maybe I'll think of something in the meantime.
Add a low cloud under water for dust particles? But that would probably have render time soar. I guess if you can't find a work-around or solution, best would be to render a non-PT crop with water and paste that in in PS.
Quote from: Dune on May 12, 2020, 01:58:08 AMAdd a low cloud under water for dust particles? But that would probably have render time soar. I guess if you can't find a work-around or solution, best would be to render a non-PT crop with water and paste that in in PS.
Cloud is not a bad idea, though time-consuming indeed. As far as the second option is concerned, it is not possible to crop the water out, as the shape is very irregular. Besides, I'm not sure if rules allow such postwork.
Maybe as a render layer... But I have never done it and it's not the time to start learning now.
Anyway, I'll post the actual situation as soon as WIP sub-forum is up, so then, hopefully, everything clears up.