Jump to content

DrScarlett

Regular Member
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

DrScarlett last won the day on June 27 2019

DrScarlett had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

7 Noble Beginner

About DrScarlett

  • Rank
    C4D Cafe Junior
  • Birthday March 27

Profile Information

  • First Name
    Doc
  • Last Name
    Scarlett
  • Location
    Netherlands

Hardware | Software Information

  • C4D
    20.057 Studio

Recent Profile Visitors

313 profile views
  1. Some more experimenting: I figured out the blotchiness comes from the IR primary, not from the LM secondary. I managed to get some nice LM settings that work, but figuring out how to smoothen out the IR over a large planar surface was beyond me. Anyone have any info or tuts I can follow on that? I think the key is in the detailed settings in the IR tab. Also I tried the QMC + LM. No significant speed increase over the 200 hour QMC+QMC render, and no significant quality difference. It clear that it is using QMC as a primary is what bites me here. However, it is the only primary
  2. Here's IR+LM (not QMC+LM as Cerbera suggested, so even a lower method than that). The direct illumination on the letters is a bit washed out, less nice details in the illumination, and some blotchiness of the green light further out on the tiles. But sort of acceptable. In just over 6 hours, lol.
  3. Haha, I enjoyed reading that, mostly because I am well aware . Don't worry, this would not have been my course of action had I a client waiting in the background Also the less perfect GI methods seem to be paying off. I seem to be getting a very comparable result (if I ignore some of the finer points) for under 7 hours of rendering. I'll show it to you later and prove your point
  4. Well, I had a look, and I have seen there are ways to use compositing tags to set quality requirements (stochastic sampling ratio, record density ratio) to force improvements where you want them. But my initial low and medium test settings were such bad results that I abandoned those directions. If you have a suggestion on what settings to use, that would be awesome.
  5. OK. It's done. This version is made like this: Scene: Outer neon class tubes is are cylinders of 20 mm diameter, wrapped onto the letter shaped splines. On top of that they have a glass thickness of 2 mm. The material is a 90% transparent material with 1.25 refraction index and a reflectance channel. The inner neon light tubes are cylinders of 10 mm diameter, wrapped onto the letter shaped splines. The material only has a luminance channel. The blue is 240% brightness, the green 350%. In both, in the Illumination channel, the generate GI is cranked up to 2500% (s
  6. Thank you for those kind words, Vizn. The clips are indeed a type of black plastic, same material as the neon tube 'hub caps' at their ends, actually. That's the way I wanted it to be, they are small details, but I wanted them to be clearly visible. I can get a bit finicky, if results are not perfect, or if solutions do not work in the way I would, hmmm, expect them to. The area lights definitely have some unexpected side effects, due to the way that feature is implemented. I have switched over to GI illumination textures and found settings and rendering settings that produce
  7. So now my next question. I will go back to trying to simulate the tubes with luminous textures and use GI to get them to render. Would anyone have any tips for the best GI render settings to use in order to get a crisp realistic result in the scene above? Is the polygon light toggle in the texture illumination tab useful to use? Do I need to use QMC to make optimal use of that?
  8. So here are the results from the cutting-the-area-lights-into-pieces method. I have cut each spline into 6-12 pieces, and then re-applied the the cylinder shapes with spline wraps to get continuous tubes in the shape of the letters. First result shows it solves the blotchy reflection problem, however, suddenly different sections of different lengths are giving off different amounts of light. I tried changing the amount of samples in each section - no change. I tried changing the visibility of each section - this only affects the brightness of the tube itself.
  9. One thing I would like to clear up, maybe, above we were not talking about rendering noise when we were talking about the maximum amount of samples - this was specifically about an idiosyncrasy of area lights, where you get blotchy reflections and specular reflections based on a specific sample setting of the area light. I can't, unfortunately, bypass that by pushing more light into them. I will still have the blotches, just more bright blotches. Also this idea probably works best with GI, which is what I was trying to avoid due to my lack of rendering power. However, the idea is valid
  10. Thank you Vizn, a few follow up questions if you don't mind. Thank you in advance for your time. yes indeed, you are right. I know about the difficulties of photographing neon. It is very hard to capture the right balance between the neon light itself and the lighting on the surrounding scene. That I can use the C4D camera to follow the same process hadn't occurred to me. I need to learn how first. I suppose I use the camera exposure settings to do this? If I add more light, how does that fix the lack of samples - I will still have blotches in my reflections and spec
  11. Hey again, I tried the GI way before I posted. The rendered results are way too, hmm, fluffy The luminance based light give little in the way of material reflections or specular reflection. Since they are based on GI, the solution might be to muck about with render settings In order to get a decent fall-off behavior of the neon light (fall-off is almost impossible to control), the luminance values need to be completely blown out, resulting in an over exposed neon tube. That in turn forces me to go to a rather complicated composite tag setup with different object
  12. Hey Cerbera, thank you. I am using swept geometry (actually spline wrapped cylinders turned editable), because the lights themselves need to be visible (as the neon gas emanating light) and have a certain thickness. They are inside wider glass tubes. I control their visibility with the visibility modifier. I tried the add grain option, but the graininess in the resulting render is terrible (also at a 1000 samples), I don't know how to improve that. I would prefer not to see any grain in the reflection. I'll focus on this for now and get back to the bump problem onc
  13. Hey Cafe-ers, I have been trying to get good looking and possibly more or less believable neon lights going. I tried both the area light approach as well as the luminance material approach. I like the area lights best because I can do it without GI, the result looks crisp, the falloff looks more natural, I get nice reflections and specular. Also i don't have to muck about with separate objects for GI and camera behavior with compositing tags and compensate for overexposed neon tubes. Regardless of this preference I am looking for tips to make good neon with vanilla r20. For
×
×
  • Create New...