September 2024 - Daz 3D New User Challenge - Depth of Field and Canvases

iaunpom

This is another topic, but after looking at, for example, the emissive surfaces in this image, the candle and the flame, which is an emissive surface that is a little bit in the background of the image with a little bit of DOF. Iray puts some pixels around the emissive surface that I don't understand. Maybe it's that the emissive maps of the flame are very few pixels and I would have to expand the UV mapping, but these pixels remind me of what happens when you make a depth map with canvases, without having the entire camera frame full of mesh. If in the background frame you see an HDRI of the global illumination and you don't put an object that covers the entire background frame as a plane, when making the canvas depth map, the mesh objects have some pixels on the edges, which Iray can't place due to lack of reference and can't do the anti-aliasing. That has made me think that there is a similar situation with the emissive surfaces, I don't know if it's something related to the convergence of the rendering, I haven't tried the degrain noise in these cases or the post denoiser, correction, I just looked at some render I made of the scene with denoiser and logically those pixels are almost not seen.

Would I have to render on canvases with the post denoiser these types of surfaces separately ? If you rendered it separately, what happens with those few pixels, in the sample image, would I say that those pixels are also seen in the reflection of the glass and not beyond the candle recipe maker throughout the scene?

Best regards

Linwelly

iaunpom said:

This is another topic, but after looking at, for example, the emissive surfaces in this image, the candle and the flame, which is an emissive surface that is a little bit in the background of the image with a little bit of DOF. Iray puts some pixels around the emissive surface that I don't understand. Maybe it's that the emissive maps of the flame are very few pixels and I would have to expand the UV mapping, but these pixels remind me of what happens when you make a depth map with canvases, without having the entire camera frame full of mesh. If in the background frame you see an HDRI of the global illumination and you don't put an object that covers the entire background frame as a plane, when making the canvas depth map, the mesh objects have some pixels on the edges, which Iray can't place due to lack of reference and can't do the anti-aliasing. That has made me think that there is a similar situation with the emissive surfaces, I don't know if it's something related to the convergence of the rendering, I haven't tried the degrain noise in these cases or the post denoiser, correction, I just looked at some render I made of the scene with denoiser and logically those pixels are almost not seen.

Would I have to render on canvases with the post denoiser these types of surfaces separately ? If you rendered it separately, what happens with those few pixels, in the sample image, would I say that those pixels are also seen in the reflection of the glass and not beyond the candle recipe maker throughout the scene?

Best regards

this looks very much like it wasn't rendered for long enough, which can happen in rather dark images. there are several things you can do in this case:

in the Progressive Rendering settings you can dial up the Max Time and the Max Samples for the image to render longer and in consequence have a better quality to work with whatever you plan after that (using canveses for example)

in the filter settings I always advice to set the Pixel filter radius to 1 or lower (the standard is 1.5, which results in faster but slightly blurry renders)

Also set the firefly filter enable to on

Personally I'm not a fan of the Noise Degrain Filter and have that set to 0. I rather experiment with the settings until I have a clear render and in the rare case it doesn't work out I prefer to take my images into a postwork image editing program. But this is my personal experience and preference, and you need to find there what works best for you.

In most cases it also helps to make the whole scene brighter and darken it in postwork in order to get rid of stray pixels

iaunpom

Linwelly said:

iaunpom said:

iaunpom said:

I thought that maybe there was a relationship when using the DOF, after reading over some of the references, for example when putting an aperture in tone mapping with more light, then in the DOF for example, the areas with light are sharper or the focus areas of the DOF have a higher exposure.

This comment after a few days seems a bit confusing to me. I had a theory that if you use the DOF, the most out-of-focus areas would have to be less bright than the sharper ones. For example, if you have a light source that is not directly seen on the screen but is seen on a reflective surface such as a mirror or other highly reflective surface and these surfaces are in the out-of-focus area, my question was or is it what happens to the luminosity of the light source, it adds to that of the surface where it is reflected and the nearby surfaces in blur,  or the surrounding blurred surfaces detract from the blur of the light source.

 

 I'm still unsure what the question is here, so let us try to disect it a bit

1. the standart f/stop in the tone map settings is 8. if you set it to 16 the amount of light that reaches the camera is reduced, if you set it to 4, more light reaches the camera (directly connected with the shutter speed if you rule out the exposure value)

2. if you want an image with sharp contrasts, you want to set your tone mapping f/stop to a hight value (eg 16) but you need more light in your scene for that to work (in the case of using the sun sky rest the SS multiplier from 0.1 to 0.5 or somethign similar) otherwise your scene becomes a muddy grey

3. none of that has a direct connection to the camera f/stop in DAZ (this is different with a real life camera) a low value in f/stop with give you a very small area in focus in your scene, a high value will make the focus area larger. This range changes as well with the distance of the camera to the focus point the farther away the camera, the larger the area. As well the focal length will affect the area of focus in your image. To make this more visible, try to look at your camera in the scene through the perspective view and see how the focus lines move when you change the settings.

I hope this answers your question? Again the best way to understand is to try several settings in a simple scene that doesn't take too long to render.

 

 I try to have a broader understanding of the rendering mechanisms and how to render each element. Whether to do it by separate canvases or parts or a rendering of the entire scene. As they say, each situation, depending on the elements, gives some results or others.
Simplifying, I try to understand how Iray interprets the situation of: you have a scene in which you see the sun, for example, a person if he looks directly at the sun is dazzled and if he does not look directly at the sun he sees the entire field of vision, including the sun. If you render for example a similar scene, how should it look?, if you add the bloom filter even if you are not focusing directly on the sun you can create the glare effect. And in outdoor scenes where the sun is not directly on the scene but falls directly on some parts or with emissive surfaces, the configuration of the Bloom filter seems complicated to me at the moment.  

iaunpom

Linwelly said:

iaunpom said:

This is another topic, but after looking at, for example, the emissive surfaces in this image, the candle and the flame, which is an emissive surface that is a little bit in the background of the image with a little bit of DOF. Iray puts some pixels around the emissive surface that I don't understand. Maybe it's that the emissive maps of the flame are very few pixels and I would have to expand the UV mapping, but these pixels remind me of what happens when you make a depth map with canvases, without having the entire camera frame full of mesh. If in the background frame you see an HDRI of the global illumination and you don't put an object that covers the entire background frame as a plane, when making the canvas depth map, the mesh objects have some pixels on the edges, which Iray can't place due to lack of reference and can't do the anti-aliasing. That has made me think that there is a similar situation with the emissive surfaces, I don't know if it's something related to the convergence of the rendering, I haven't tried the degrain noise in these cases or the post denoiser, correction, I just looked at some render I made of the scene with denoiser and logically those pixels are almost not seen.

Would I have to render on canvases with the post denoiser these types of surfaces separately ? If you rendered it separately, what happens with those few pixels, in the sample image, would I say that those pixels are also seen in the reflection of the glass and not beyond the candle recipe maker throughout the scene?

Best regards

this looks very much like it wasn't rendered for long enough, which can happen in rather dark images. there are several things you can do in this case:

in the Progressive Rendering settings you can dial up the Max Time and the Max Samples for the image to render longer and in consequence have a better quality to work with whatever you plan after that (using canveses for example)

in the filter settings I always advice to set the Pixel filter radius to 1 or lower (the standard is 1.5, which results in faster but slightly blurry renders)

Also set the firefly filter enable to on

Personally I'm not a fan of the Noise Degrain Filter and have that set to 0. I rather experiment with the settings until I have a clear render and in the rare case it doesn't work out I prefer to take my images into a postwork image editing program. But this is my personal experience and preference, and you need to find there what works best for you.

In most cases it also helps to make the whole scene brighter and darken it in postwork in order to get rid of stray pixels

 

Yes, the rendering is short, but the three four pixels are still in renders of more pixels, reflecting and expanding caustically in the room, I would say. And the scene has lighting difficulties, looking for realistic night lighting and for the moon to illuminate part of the scene with the Sun-Sky, using the sun as the moon ... I'm still thinking about how to solve it... Where does the sun go using Daz's Sun-Sky when it crosses the horizon line ? Just kidding, it's not a question, just a thought I have, but... 

Fishtales

For Moonlight in a night scene outside I use a distant light set at 4500 temperature, 0.5 Lumen then set up the Tone Mapping to get the brightness. I use camera settings which can work out at Shutter Speed down to 30, and ISO up to 800.

Playing about with the Australia Ecology, DOF and lighting (just Sun and Sky). You can se the lights on the Tank are just round circles but before that they were larger and full of dots which gradually disappeared as the render finished. A Denoiser wasn't used. The sharp area is across the front of the rocket in the launcher.

No DOF in this one.

2024-09-13 15:27:44.173 [INFO] :: Total Rendering Time: 47 minutes 28.97 seconds

2024-09-14 12:47:54.811 [INFO] :: Total Rendering Time: 59 minutes 40.9 seconds

2024-09-15 11:23:46.630 [INFO] :: Total Rendering Time: 40 minutes 10.75 seconds

2024-09-15 11:54:20.872 [INFO] :: Total Rendering Time: 18 minutes 40.78 seconds

2024-09-15 12:23:02.097 [INFO] :: Total Rendering Time: 10 minutes 48.50 seconds

Click on images for full size.

Linwelly

iaunpom said:

Linwelly said:

iaunpom said:

This is another topic, but after looking at, for example, the emissive surfaces in this image, the candle and the flame, which is an emissive surface that is a little bit in the background of the image with a little bit of DOF. Iray puts some pixels around the emissive surface that I don't understand. Maybe it's that the emissive maps of the flame are very few pixels and I would have to expand the UV mapping, but these pixels remind me of what happens when you make a depth map with canvases, without having the entire camera frame full of mesh. If in the background frame you see an HDRI of the global illumination and you don't put an object that covers the entire background frame as a plane, when making the canvas depth map, the mesh objects have some pixels on the edges, which Iray can't place due to lack of reference and can't do the anti-aliasing. That has made me think that there is a similar situation with the emissive surfaces, I don't know if it's something related to the convergence of the rendering, I haven't tried the degrain noise in these cases or the post denoiser, correction, I just looked at some render I made of the scene with denoiser and logically those pixels are almost not seen.

Would I have to render on canvases with the post denoiser these types of surfaces separately ? If you rendered it separately, what happens with those few pixels, in the sample image, would I say that those pixels are also seen in the reflection of the glass and not beyond the candle recipe maker throughout the scene?

Best regards

this looks very much like it wasn't rendered for long enough, which can happen in rather dark images. there are several things you can do in this case:

in the Progressive Rendering settings you can dial up the Max Time and the Max Samples for the image to render longer and in consequence have a better quality to work with whatever you plan after that (using canveses for example)

in the filter settings I always advice to set the Pixel filter radius to 1 or lower (the standard is 1.5, which results in faster but slightly blurry renders)

Also set the firefly filter enable to on

Personally I'm not a fan of the Noise Degrain Filter and have that set to 0. I rather experiment with the settings until I have a clear render and in the rare case it doesn't work out I prefer to take my images into a postwork image editing program. But this is my personal experience and preference, and you need to find there what works best for you.

In most cases it also helps to make the whole scene brighter and darken it in postwork in order to get rid of stray pixels

 

Yes, the rendering is short, but the three four pixels are still in renders of more pixels, reflecting and expanding caustically in the room, I would say. And the scene has lighting difficulties, looking for realistic night lighting and for the moon to illuminate part of the scene with the Sun-Sky, using the sun as the moon ... I'm still thinking about how to solve it... Where does the sun go using Daz's Sun-Sky when it crosses the horizon line ? Just kidding, it's not a question, just a thought I have, but... 

it might be easyest if you make a screenshot of your settings together with the full scene rendered, so I can take a look what is really there and what might have caused it

iaunpom

This is an image with 5000 samples, the first one I have sent I could not say, but it would be about 1000 samples. In the 5000 it seems that those pixels are starting to be integrated more into the image, I don't know how many samples I would need to finish those pixels fully integrated. I've been varying the rendering settings, what I think affects the pixels the most maybe is the spectral rendering option that I don't understand very well, but it does like a background of colored pixels that are integrated and mixed to make something similar to a scattering effect of the colors of the surfaces. When you look at those more blended pixels of the flame it looks like they're just blending with the RGB primary colors.

I also have to look at the resolution of the UV mapping of the flame and zoom in to see if there is any variation, I don't know what kind of effect it has on those pixels but they seem like few pixels to me. It has a 2048x2048 texture map and this is the mapping.

The original set I used doesn't have any mapping on the emissive surface of the flame and I've made one to try to do some details, that may also cause those pixels and it's not originally intended to be mapped.

I'll try on a simple set I have from the scene, the candle from the original set and the one I've modified together, to see what the result is

Fishtales

The coloured pixels around the flame are from the refraction through the glass cover.

iaunpom

Fishtales said:

The coloured pixels around the flame are from the refraction through the glass cover.

It's a posibility

 

iaunpom

But no, it seems to be something more related to the difference in white or luminosity values of the pixels, because the scene has dim light and the luminosity value of the pixels around the candle flame is very distant and generates convergence difficulties for Iray, I will ask in the nuts and bolts forum to see if there is any solution to solve this type of rendering situations.

In the test images with the original object it seems to make fewer pixels but also the flame is smaller, I will try to make the UV map of the flame bigger.

Linwelly

iaunpom said:

But no, it seems to be something more related to the difference in white or luminosity values of the pixels, because the scene has dim light and the luminosity value of the pixels around the candle flame is very distant and generates convergence difficulties for Iray, I will ask in the nuts and bolts forum to see if there is any solution to solve this type of rendering situations.

In the test images with the original object it seems to make fewer pixels but also the flame is smaller, I will try to make the UV map of the flame bigger.

can you tell me which product you used for the candle and flame, so I can try and test it, and see what's going on?

iaunpom

Yes, Rustic Living Room Product ID: 24082. And it's not just the candle, the emissive surface of the fireplace does too, I had a canvas rendering and I've noticed. I'm going to do some renderings to try to explain what it said.

Linwelly

iaunpom said:

Yes, Rustic Living Room Product ID: 24082. And it's not just the candle, the emissive surface of the fireplace does too, I had a canvas rendering and I've noticed. I'm going to do some renderings to try to explain what it said.

I own that product, will look into it

Linwelly

so @iaunpom can you do me a favour and test render that scene with the firefly filter off? (default is on so I assume you had it probably on all the time)

here are some experiments I did

this one is the room area of the fire and candles rendered without any changes (dome scene standart)

and this is a closeup on the candle and yes I get those stray pixeld as well (not fully convergenced but that would have taken too long seeing that it's only at 8% at that point)

here is the mesh of the candleflame and since this is a funny egg with all the surface being emissive there shouldn't be any transitional pixels which is different for the fireplace that has a transmap that defines the amount of luminance besides the emissive map

for a test I turned off the firefly filter and was very surprised that this results in a much brighter overall image

so I tried with the camera back to the complete fireplace with candles and those were much brighter there as well.

of course now we have stray light pixels all over the place now but the amount by which the overall light setting gets reduced is really baflling me

both the first and the last were rendered to the standard 5000 Samples. More smaples would have gotten rid a a substancial amount of stray pixels

 

So I would like to know if you get similar results for this situation, as well I will ask back about that difference the firefly filter makes

 

iaunpom

About the firefly filter the difference in ON and OFF in the preview at 200 samples I get more white pixels if I look at the candle.  Img_1 ON Img_1 OFF

With the Post Denoiser ON filter, the results that appear in the preview are similar to those you have shown me with the firefly filter in ON and OFF. Img_2 ON Img_2 OFF

With the Caustic Sampler ON in the preview to 200 samples and without firefly filter or post Denoiser the result that appears to me. Img_3 ON

 

And if I leave aside how tedious it is for me to find the contrasted technical information of the result of those pixels in the rendering, now I know that candles and those pixels do not generate reflection or caustic refraction in the room. And the set-up generates a beautiful, perhaps casual, poetics. When activating the Bloom filter on the last setting Img_3 ON, it seems that perhaps the candles are containers that were full of fireflies, or it is what a room in the field has and they have entered through the window. 
Img_4 

By activating the firefly filter in the Img_4 setting the fireflies leave. Img_4 ON

It is an illusion, the fireflies in the room are generated by the lamp that is out of frame, when hiding or extinguishing it the fireflies leave and are not generated by the candles or the glass container with the set configuration. Img_5

Images Img_4, Img_4 ON, Img_5. They have another lighting setup I've closed the scene and I couldn't say for sure, but I think it's this one. Img_6.

 

Linwelly

@iaunpom thanks a lot for testing all that, at this point the stray pixels you find around the emissive light sources seem to be a technical problem, that will not be solved that easily, so the question is if I can help you find a way to work around it.  What is the scene you are planning on with that set? For example if you wanted to place a character or something else for a story in front of the fireplace you could use DOF to focus on the character and with that get rid of stray pixels in a more general way,

or you could just go and replace the candles with some other candles which are transmapped

iaunpom

En este momento estoy trabajando en la configuración de este conjunto, podría seguir un rato con los detalles, la lámpara inicialmente se ve un poco extraña, y la que he modificado aún no he conseguido configurarla como me gustaría, en las velas sigo trabajando, y las llamas de la chimenea son complicadas, el color más amarillento combinado con la configuración inicial del conjunto, Pero después de hacer cambios con el tono general de la escena, no me gusta nada. Si consigo el tono y el aspecto que me gusta, la luz emisiva se reduce, y cuando aplicas el filtro de floración ves la diferencia de intensidad más clara.
Hice pruebas con los lienzos y el filtro de floración, puedo renderizarlo por separado en el lienzo emisivo con la llama, tendré que aplicar alguna capa para separar las llamas y podré iluminar un poco más con el resultado del filtro de floración. Por el momento no sé cómo equilibrar la iluminación emisiva y la apariencia de las superficies emisivas, así que tengo que componer la imagen, lograr la imagen en un solo render es lo que busco , si es posible.

Las imágenes se representan como se muestra en la imagen, y la iluminación global base

iaunpom

I'm still stuck, not like in the initial images that I've also worked on a bit, but the initial idea I had still carries more weight. The theme would be to integrate the initial image, perhaps not as a painting or illustration, and a character on the set of the room, perhaps working on a computer with Daz in that image, or watching television with that image, or playing a game on a console or computer.

Linwelly

iaunpom said:

En este momento estoy trabajando en la configuración de este conjunto, podría seguir un rato con los detalles, la lámpara inicialmente se ve un poco extraña, y la que he modificado aún no he conseguido configurarla como me gustaría, en las velas sigo trabajando, y las llamas de la chimenea son complicadas, el color más amarillento combinado con la configuración inicial del conjunto, Pero después de hacer cambios con el tono general de la escena, no me gusta nada. Si consigo el tono y el aspecto que me gusta, la luz emisiva se reduce, y cuando aplicas el filtro de floración ves la diferencia de intensidad más clara.
Hice pruebas con los lienzos y el filtro de floración, puedo renderizarlo por separado en el lienzo emisivo con la llama, tendré que aplicar alguna capa para separar las llamas y podré iluminar un poco más con el resultado del filtro de floración. Por el momento no sé cómo equilibrar la iluminación emisiva y la apariencia de las superficies emisivas, así que tengo que componer la imagen, lograr la imagen en un solo render es lo que busco , si es posible.

Las imágenes se representan como se muestra en la imagen, y la iluminación global base

yes, while I was working with it I didn't like the flame of the fire, there are two things I would suggest for the fireplace. 

If you look at the emissive surface of the fire you will find that the Emission temperature is set to a very high value that doesn't fit that of a flame at all, I would suggest to set that value to something between 2900 and 3500

As well in the emmission colour dial there is an orange colour, you don't need that, set it to white, and the map of the fire in that channel is in some extreme yellow and orange colours, you could take that texture map to photoshop/gimp and alter it to usefull flame colours, safe as a new map into the same folder and then selec the new texture map inside daz.

I hope that helps you on the next steps

Linwelly

iaunpom said:

I'm still stuck, not like in the initial images that I've also worked on a bit, but the initial idea I had still carries more weight. The theme would be to integrate the initial image, perhaps not as a painting or illustration, and a character on the set of the room, perhaps working on a computer with Daz in that image, or watching television with that image, or playing a game on a console or computer.

that would be a funny idea

Aki3d

RATS

intermediate

Fog, Dof, Glossiness and Spacularity edited with Canvases

rtx 4060  10min  1700 iteration

Linwelly

Aki3d said:

RATS

intermediate

Fog, Dof, Glossiness and Spacularity edited with Canvases

rtx 4060  10min  1700 iteration

well played !

iaunpom

A reference image, the HDRI that I have used has given me the lighting backwards, the tones of the exterior I wanted to be on the inside and those of the exterior on the inside, maybe I lie with the canvases, or work this lighting.

Arugula Rugula

Hello,

I been lurking and waivering back and forth as to whether I wanted to enter the beginner challenge. I thought why not so here is my submission. Better late than sorry I guess. If this entry doesn't quaIify for any reason I can submit another, I made a few other renders practicing DOF. Im pretty new to DAZ3D so a lot of what DAZ can do is unknown to me at the moment. I am not sure how much time I have to correct anything in this image but feedback and tips are definately welcome. I did edit the image in Photoshop and learned about using Bloom in DAZ right afterwards so I did not use it to make the cool fancy glowing in the image.

Title: The Eternal Rose

Level: Beginner Challenge

Software: DAZ3D + Photoshop CC 2024 for mild color correction, glowing and magic (paint brushed)

 

Linwelly

iaunpom said:

A reference image, the HDRI that I have used has given me the lighting backwards, the tones of the exterior I wanted to be on the inside and those of the exterior on the inside, maybe I lie with the canvases, or work this lighting.

It's still looking very nice, though. As a genery HDRIs are not very good at lighting up the interior, so you can rather choose to use a darker HDRI for the outside mood and then light up the interior with additional light sources besides the ones given in the set.

Aside from that you can choose the surface for your screen and add the image you used there in the emissive channel as well with a very low intensity, but then it actually looks like an active screen

Linwelly

Arugula Rugula said:

Hello,

I been lurking and waivering back and forth as to whether I wanted to enter the beginner challenge. I thought why not so here is my submission. Better late than sorry I guess. If this entry doesn't quaIify for any reason I can submit another, I made a few other renders practicing DOF. Im pretty new to DAZ3D so a lot of what DAZ can do is unknown to me at the moment. I am not sure how much time I have to correct anything in this image but feedback and tips are definately welcome. I did edit the image in Photoshop and learned about using Bloom in DAZ right afterwards so I did not use it to make the cool fancy glowing in the image.

Title: The Eternal Rose

Level: Beginner Challenge

Software: DAZ3D + Photoshop CC 2024 for mild color correction, glowing and magic (paint brushed)

 

this looks amazing! The choice of focus and the light settings really work perfectly together, there is really nothing I could say that would make an improvement

Arugula Rugula

Linwelly said:

Arugula Rugula said:

Hello,

I been lurking and waivering back and forth as to whether I wanted to enter the beginner challenge. I thought why not so here is my submission. Better late than sorry I guess. If this entry doesn't quaIify for any reason I can submit another, I made a few other renders practicing DOF. Im pretty new to DAZ3D so a lot of what DAZ can do is unknown to me at the moment. I am not sure how much time I have to correct anything in this image but feedback and tips are definately welcome. I did edit the image in Photoshop and learned about using Bloom in DAZ right afterwards so I did not use it to make the cool fancy glowing in the image.

Title: The Eternal Rose

Level: Beginner Challenge

Software: DAZ3D + Photoshop CC 2024 for mild color correction, glowing and magic (paint brushed)

 

this looks amazing! The choice of focus and the light settings really work perfectly together, there is really nothing I could say that would make an improvement

Thank you so much for saying that! Im happy and grateful that these challenges exist 

Arugula Rugula

Linwelly said:

Arugula Rugula said:

Hello,

I been lurking and waivering back and forth as to whether I wanted to enter the beginner challenge. I thought why not so here is my submission. Better late than sorry I guess. If this entry doesn't quaIify for any reason I can submit another, I made a few other renders practicing DOF. Im pretty new to DAZ3D so a lot of what DAZ can do is unknown to me at the moment. I am not sure how much time I have to correct anything in this image but feedback and tips are definately welcome. I did edit the image in Photoshop and learned about using Bloom in DAZ right afterwards so I did not use it to make the cool fancy glowing in the image.

Title: The Eternal Rose

Level: Beginner Challenge

Software: DAZ3D + Photoshop CC 2024 for mild color correction, glowing and magic (paint brushed)

 

this looks amazing! The choice of focus and the light settings really work perfectly together, there is really nothing I could say that would make an improvement

Thank you so much for saying that! Im happy and grateful that these challenges exist 

Elor

A question related to Canvases: does someone have a guide/tutorial on how to work with EXR files in Affinity Photo ?

Arugula Rugula > It look really great

Linwelly

Elor said:

A question related to Canvases: does someone have a guide/tutorial on how to work with EXR files in Affinity Photo ?

Arugula Rugula > It look really great

I never worked with Affinity photo, so all I can offer is the result from a quick search. I had the impression this thread  deal with some of the problems and offers more likns with solutions, I hope it helps:

https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/197554-blender-exr-to-affinity-the-technical-aspect-of-this-is-overwhelming-to-me/