Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

R13 Physical Renderer And Camera

29 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

I cannot get a good render from the physical renderer, is there a tutorial somewhere that shows how to optimize it and decrease the grain and time?? I'm getting worse quality and time than the standard renderer. I also cannot get my DOF to work even with the Front and rear blur set to on, or off, on the physical camera and the aperture at 1.4...

Edited by Keign

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I cannot get a good render from the physical renderer, is there a tutorial somewhere that shows how to optimize it and decrease the grain and time?? I'm getting worse quality and time than the standard renderer. I also cannot get my DOF to work even with the Front and rear blur set on the physical camera and the aperture at 1.4...

Well I can get a decent result, and with DoF, but that's with just arbitrary settings, and I haven't found any tutorials that explain why my settings work, and as usual, the manual is of almost zero help in explaining what might be good starter settings. The nearest I have seento something that might help you so far is GSG's Intro to R13 which does sort of lay out some of it.

But yeah, roll on the tut vids that shows us comprehensively how... I imagine HSrdelic / Vertex Pusher and others are working on it, so am confident there will be some fairly soon smile.gif

CBR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm sure there will be, I just thought there might be something out there already from the Beta team or others that have had r13 for a year now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Have you seen the greyscale gorilla intro to the physical renderer? Lots of good tips in there on bits and pieces.

Oh, and with the camera, as it's a physical camera the front and rear blur options you don't need or use.

If you want a high blur amount you need to use the equivalent of a zoom lens to get the large change in DOF. You can also manually crank the blur up abnormally by then decreasing the f-stop.

It's the same with motion blur too. It's all about your shutter angle.

To be honest, you are best looking into actual camera techniques than looking at cg tutorials.

M

Edited by morpheus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think I've seen a little of it, I'll check it out again, thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I should be getting an insane DOF with an f-stop of 1, I wonder why I'm barely getting any. I've tried adjusting the focal distance and plane, as well as zooming in and out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I own a DSLR and know all about the actually camera, but with a 50mm prime lens on 1.8 aperture on my real camera, the DOF is wicked. With a DOF of 1 in C4D on a 50mm it's barely noticeable, zoomed or not, telephoto or not. Maybe I'm missing something. I don't know that it directly translates perfect.

Edited by Keign

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Make sure you are also replicating the distance of the subject from the lens.

M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Here's a scene file for you to try, which should show you some DoF and HQ rendering... let me know if it works for you...

Edited by cerbera

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Thanks Cerbera I'll check it out here in a few.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hi Keign. I'm guessing here as I haven't had time to install R13 yet!!! But with Vray being a physical render engine there are things I have learnt over the years which might help. Scale is very important. If you're modelling a pen, then set the units to real world measurements. Make it the length of a real pen. Then things should work like a physical camera. You may be getting tiny amounts of DOF because your opject is way too big in the scene. Try reducing it and test render again bigsmile.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm sure scale probably has a lot to do with it, but stock scale should be optimal, it would be pretty inefficient to have to resize everything I create from primitives. I'll try messing with scene scale as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Re motion blur. I found it easier to use a slow shutter speed rather than using shutter angle.

3DKiwi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It's soooooo slow...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

So does it work the same as a real camera, more light = less grain? I know it doesn't work that way with the exposure and shutter speed, not with grain anyways. Unless I did something wrong in my test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I'm also finding the new Physical Render engine super slow. It also seems to not support caustics. MAXON spent a lot of time to make a bad render engine. I'm not sure what they were thinking. They could have fixed DOF for the render engine they had.

Most people that did not like the old render engine probably also moved on by now. I know I did.

Edited by Fastbee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Caustics worked when I tried it with a caustics scene from the content browser. I think it's just going to take some direction from MAXON and some time and tutorials to really get it figured out. We have a class scheduled at work for next Friday, hopefully I'll be able to get some real insight on how to work this renderer and get faster results. I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume it's just my lack of understanding and not a bad renderer, for now :P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It is definitely slower in some cases, and the grain seems to be part of the physical renderer's output. It certainly is 'a look'...I can almost get rid of it with the highest render settings, but as you say, that takes ages.

So whilst I am pleased it's there, thank goodness they didn't take out the old renderer so we have it to fall back on. I'm also fairly sure that none of us really know what we're doing in the new one yet, so maybe we'll get better results when we do, and shouldn't be too quick to dismiss it this early ? That is rubbish if it doesn't do caustics though.

CBR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Re' caustics. What version of R13 do you have. I have Broadcast and it misses caustics and displacement. MAXON could add this as it's the only features missing that are useful to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Caustics works for me with R13. Here's an old CB caustics scene rendered in R13 with both the standard and physical renderer.

In my opinion the Physical rendered version is much better. In fact I would say the quality of the standard rendered version is awful. The modest increase in render time was well worth it.

The grain you're getting with the Physical renderer can be reduced by increasing the sampling level. The default is very low. However as you increase quality you increase render time. You won't want to be using the Physical Renderer for all of your rendering.

3DKiwi

Load these then flick backwards and forwards using the next and previous buttons found near the top left and right hand edges of the image.

R13 standard renderer. AA Best

R13 Physical renderer. Sampling set to high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I see. My mistake. Caustics do work when using lights, but they don't seem to work with HDRIs unless the old GI engine is used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

After some more tests the physical render does not seem to calculate the caustics right when using an HDRI. It also take a lot longer for the old GI engine to work with the physical render engine.

Here are some examples.

1m19s physical render with HDRI

post-60231-0-45066100-1315550903_thumb.j

1s standard render with HDRI. The caustics look way better here.

post-60231-0-97670900-1315551007_thumb.j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

mmm, I think the Physical one looks real whereas the Std renderer looks overdone and clearly CG.

3DKiwi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Here is a render from unbiased render engine Thea Render.

It shows that not only is the standard render engine closer, but it is surprisingly close to perfect.

post-60231-0-19027900-1315580018_thumb.j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Dunno why your caustics look so different from standard render to physical.

Mine look almost the same.

M

EDIT: Just saw you were doing it with only HDRI and no lights. I would never set up a scene with caustics like that anyways.

Edited by morpheus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0