Can you help me recreate this hightlight/outline/shadow/tone/? effect?

kataiarpad

Hi,

I'm rendering the same scene with the same settings and they come out different compared to what they looked like in June.

I'm not sure what to call this effect but if you compare the two attached pictures you should clearly see the difference.
I'd like to recreate the 'old' render.

What changed:
- Daz Studio version (I used the latest final version available then and now I use the latest public beta)
- Graphics card (nvidia 780Ti -> 1080)

Back then the way I achieved this effect was by turning on the architectural and caustic samplers. They are still on but the effect is lost.

mjc1016

It looks to me like the camera headlamp is on in the new render...

kataiarpad

I always have a turned-off light in the scene to block the headlamp but the headlamp was indeed on auto and the general settings had "if no scene lights".
Thank you for the suggestion! I'm running a render with the headlamp set to off and "never" in the general settings.

kataiarpad

That wasn't it. The render looks the same. (see attachment new2)

 

kataiarpad

Hi,

My renders of the same scene come out different compared to what they looked like in June.

I'm not sure what to call this effect but if you compare the two attached pictures you should clearly see the difference.
I'd like to recreate the 'old' render.

What changed:
- Daz Studio version (I used the latest final version available then and now I use the latest public beta)
- Graphics card (nvidia 780Ti -> 1080)

Back then the way I achieved this effect was by turning on the architectural and caustic samplers.
They are still on but the effect is lost.

Elsewhere it was suggested that the camera's headlamp was on. This is not the case.

I've tried adjusting tone settings but that just makes the whole thing darker/lighter/etc.
Nothing seems to get the render even close to having this effect.

 

Chohole

Threads merged.

Please do not start multiple threads on the same subject.  If you wish to move your thread from one forum to anther then you need to click to edit the top post and change the Category.

Thanks

kataiarpad

After running a bunch of renders with and without architectural and caustic samplers the conclusion is that for whatever reason these samplers are making almost no difference now.
They still do make the render take about five times longer though.

This is pretty disappointing since I really liked that effect.

AndyS

Hi,

for me it pretty looks as if there is an additional light source in the second picture of your opening post, which is not a headlamp. It seems to come from the top left.
After my experience the headlamp only of the active (currently used) camera is switched on. So in your case it is a different source.

kataiarpad

AndyS said:

Hi,

for me it pretty looks as if there is an additional light source in the second picture of your opening post, which is not a headlamp. It seems to come from the top left.
After my experience the headlamp only of the active (currently used) camera is switched on. So in your case it is a different source.

Nope, that's not it. The scene is exactly the same as before.
The difference must be due to the new hardware (and IRAY).

kitakoredaz

If you still have product ver ,open same scene with Porduct ver then render,, then compre it,,  how change?

 you know we can install both version about beta and product.

And render setting may change if you set option "ignore when open scene" or "record when save scene" in user preference >scene option.

to confirm not change render setting (keep setting about saved scene) ,  need to set them correctly.

 

(I usualy set Render settings > check "record when saved scene" then do not check "ignore render setting when open the scene"

 Actually when  I compare two png,  new one is clearly get more light from the top to the actor, (and from  camera direction)

but it may happen by iray or hard ware,, to know it,, I hope you render same scene with public version too. with same render setting .

 

AndyS

Ah, com'on,

kataiarpad said:

AndyS said:

Hi,

for me it pretty looks as if there is an additional light source in the second picture of your opening post, which is not a headlamp. It seems to come from the top left.
After my experience the headlamp only of the active (currently used) camera is switched on. So in your case it is a different source.

Nope, that's not it. The scene is exactly the same as before.
The difference must be due to the new hardware (and IRAY).

That's an absolute nogo, if a different version of DAZ / nVidia renderer or graphic card creates light without any physical source. It claims to be photoreal at least.
The reason must be a changed light setup. (different skydome, render settings, additional lights, ...)

areg5

Are you rendering scene only or dome and scene?

kataiarpad

I am rendering with dome and scene.
The dome is DimensionTheory's Yosemite (the 3rd one with the dried out tree in the middle and mountains+waterfall in the background).
There is a directional light in the scene. It is switched off. Its only function is to block the headlamp.
The only other source of light is a mesh light (very flat cylinder moved to the position of the sun in the dome).
I've attached the environment settings. As you can see it basically has everything on default.
The only other setting that's not default is the exposure value which I set to 11 because I was too lazy to to fine-tune the brightness of the artifical mesh light "sun".

The render settings were saved with the scene. (of course there was no spectral render option back then but it is switched off now anyway)

I agree with AndyS that the result should be the same, but the fact is that it's not.

When starting this thread I was hoping some guru would just drop in and be like "yeah Nvidia's SDK doesn't have that feature yet" or something like that.

I'm a newbie when it comes to rendering. The effect was definitely not achieved by fine-tuning the render settings since I just leave almost everything on default.
I simply tried turning on architectural and caustic samplers one time back in June and got this cool result. (It took like 20+ hours to render a single picture so I put this hobby on hold until I could upgrade my HW.)
I just thought this is what those samplers would do every time.

Oh and I never did any after effects so that can't be it either.

kataiarpad

Here are two better comparison images
They were both rendered back in June.
Render settings and scene content as well as Daz Studio version and Hardware are completely identical.
The only difference is turning architectural and caustic samplers on.

WARNING: Bare breasts. Download & view at your own discretion.

Moderator edit    Links removed

 

 

 

areg5

Maybe it's me, but I don't see any diffderence between those two images.  I would try rendering scene only and see it there is a difference.

kataiarpad

areg5 said:

Maybe it's me, but I don't see any diffderence between those two images.  I would try rendering scene only and see it there is a difference.

I just double-checked to make sure I didn't make a mistake with the upload. The files are correct. If you can't see the difference then I don't know what to tell you.
Do you see the difference between the two pics in the first post? It's the same thing but a lot more of it and in a lot better resolution.

Sure I could mess around with the lighting but what would that accomplish? If the effect was there in June with the same settings then modifying them would just take me further away from it.

The fact that nobody has recognized this effect so far is making me lose hope that I'll ever be able to recreate it.
Does anyone even agree with me that it looks good? Or am I being some fringe weirdo here?

areg5

kataiarpad said:

areg5 said:

Maybe it's me, but I don't see any diffderence between those two images.  I would try rendering scene only and see it there is a difference.

I just double-checked to make sure I didn't make a mistake with the upload. The files are correct. If you can't see the difference then I don't know what to tell you.
Do you see the difference between the two pics in the first post? It's the same thing but a lot more of it and in a lot better resolution.

Sure I could mess around with the lighting but what would that accomplish? If the effect was there in June with the same settings then modifying them would just take me further away from it.

The fact that nobody has recognized this effect so far is making me lose hope that I'll ever be able to recreate it.
Does anyone even agree with me that it looks good? Or am I being some fringe weirdo here?

I don't see the difference in the original either.

kitakoredaz

>areg5  if you open the top two image by your　blowzer,,  r-click ,to open  different tab, then click one by one,, it show those image, as if animation.

then you may clear see difference. (though it should be more clear,, you download and compare as layer ),, 

actually I could not see clear difference, when I just compare  them on same  page.

 though I know the difference,, I feel,, the  2nd image strong light reduce  the  first image effect (somelike shadow or as if black sweat,,  covered hand or face skin, part),,, 

kataiarpad

kitakoredaz said:

>areg5  if you open the top two image by your　blowzer,,  r-click ,to open  different tab, then click one by one,, it show those image, as if animation.

then you may clear see difference. (though it should be more clear,, you download and compare as layer ),, 

actually I could not see clear difference, when I just compare  them on same  page.

 though I know the difference,, I feel,, the  2nd image strong light reduce  the  first image effect (somelike shadow or as if black sweat,,  covered hand or face skin, part),,, 

Yeah it looks like that but actually it's sort of the other way around. The lighting is the same. It is the architectural and caustic samplers that created the darker parts.
But that was only back in June. Now they do almost nothing and renders come out looking like the "brighter" pic with or without the samplers on.

By the way, which one do you prefer?

kitakoredaz

I know already you manetioned those dark water like effect are caused by when you turn on architectural and caustic samplers. .

 then if the effect  is  your intention,, you may no need other view.  

but if you ask  which is more naturall,, I feel second one.   

Then,, if your intention was  to add realistic naturall sweat or drip water on her skin,, I think,, you can find  another beter way.  but if it happend to show such effect by architectural and caustic samplers,,  and you felt  interesting, (somehow misterious ) and it fit your feeling more about  the scene,   you may try with more those setting to see same effect, I think. (though you said,, you could  not,,) 

I know, even though I rotate only 5 degree,, one light angle,,  I often feel,, my render perfectly change,,,  same thing often happen about camera angle. or light parameters..  or just change  eye edge a,, little bit up,,, after that,, render  I lfeel,, I perfectly break my render,, and feel bad,,

but when I ask it to my firend,, with two render image,,  they often say,, "  hm??   yeah,, if you say  so,, Iyes,,,  feel, so,,,"