CoolColJ's test pics thread

Get feedback from others on your works in progress
User avatar
CoolColJ
Posts: 1734
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:47 pm

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by CoolColJ » Sat Jun 12, 2010 12:39 am

Still getting lots of random BSODs even when doing nothing.

I dropped back to 1x6Gb kit and it works fine, then I try to run this kit at 1500+ mhtz, it's rated for 1600mhtz it crashes... swap to the other kit and try and run it, it runs fine at over 1500mhz....

Ok it looks like 1 kit has a damaged stick in it, but it tests fine in the windows memory tester...
Guess I return it and try and swap for another set, if not get my money back for that one

edit - With the good kit, I can boot fine into windows at 4.2ghz, with pretty conservative voltages and at the full 1600mhtz ram speed. Damn I should have done this last week, would have saved me much headache!!!! :evil:

reran the test scenes again now at 4.2ghz and full ram speed in v2.4.3 - better numbers

caterpilla 740k/sec
Erotica 1126k
Pins 862k

User avatar
dag
Posts: 189
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 2:28 am

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by dag » Sat Jun 12, 2010 5:32 am

You're running with 2T command rate?
What's the white stuff on top of the tree in second render?

User avatar
CoolColJ
Posts: 1734
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:47 pm

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by CoolColJ » Sat Jun 12, 2010 12:04 pm

dag wrote:You're running with 2T command rate?
What's the white stuff on top of the tree in second render?
Yeah, it's preset like that with the XMP memory SPD profile in the BIOS, read off the ram. The ram is rated to run at 1600mhtz, 9-9-9-24 timings, 1.65 volts and 1.35 volt on the QPI/VTT

The white thing is the sun with partial development of aperture diffraction :)
You need MLT for proper aperture diffraction, but MLT is slower in this outdoor type scene than the new Path tracing code
im1276230886.jpg
I was experimenting with it yesterday :)
pretty cool, but I'm trying to emulate the same effect I see with my own eyes on bright light sources and specular reflections, where it's more random and a lot more off shoots. The smaller the aperture the more dramatic the effect.

caustics very slow to show in this scene, most probably due to the low sun position
im1276233484.jpg

User avatar
dag
Posts: 189
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 2:28 am

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by dag » Sun Jun 13, 2010 3:23 am

How did you get those really long flares? Tried 200.000 different settings.
Try obstacle maps for different effects.
Attachments
om.png
Obstacle Map
2.jpg
1.jpg
At least some randomness
quickrender2.jpg
AD?

User avatar
CoolColJ
Posts: 1734
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:47 pm

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by CoolColJ » Sun Jun 13, 2010 4:31 am

what you circled is the sun with a small bit of aperture diffraction, but it doesn't work well unless you use bidirectional MLT

As far as long flares go, after the experimentation I did yesterday, it's down to using a really smaller aperture size like f32- f64, and blade_curvature_radius of around 1, and a blade offset above 0.5

Both renders used similar values to below
f32 used here

<aperture_radius>0.000403</aperture_radius>
<aperture_shape>
<generated>
<num_blades>8</num_blades>
<blade_offset>0.600000</blade_offset>
<blade_curvature_radius>1.000000</blade_curvature_radius>
<start_angle>0.100000</start_angle>
</generated>
</aperture_shape>

The smaller the blade offset, the blurrier the image gets from testing. Values above 0.4 become clearer
I haven't tried any of the other stuff like obstacle maps etc yet.

above values with 16 blades, blade_offset of 0.01 8)
blade_offset of 0.01.jpg
0.1
blade_offset of 0.1.jpg
0.2
blade_offset of 0.2.jpg

User avatar
dag
Posts: 189
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 2:28 am

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by dag » Sun Jun 13, 2010 5:46 am

Blendigo only goes to 0.5 offset, but edited the igs with your settings. Still no really long flares here. Seems to be restricted to that square space.

What exporter do you use?
Can you post the igs without any objects, just the sun?
Attachments
001.jpg
.01 offset, 16 blades
06.jpg
.6 offset, 8 blades

User avatar
Ryouta Sumeragi
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 4:11 am
Location: Japan

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by Ryouta Sumeragi » Sun Jun 13, 2010 10:54 am

dag wrote:Blendigo only goes to 0.5 offset, but edited the igs with your settings. Still no really long flares here. Seems to be restricted to that square space.

What exporter do you use?
Can you post the igs without any objects, just the sun?
The memory doesn't suffice.

Or, if you are using 32 bit version, it is a specification......

User avatar
dag
Posts: 189
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 2:28 am

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by dag » Sun Jun 13, 2010 11:50 am

If you're referring to my RAM, I have 8 juicy gigs. I have blender 2.49b 64-bit, blendigo 2.4.3 and also indigo 2.4.4 64-bit.

User avatar
CoolColJ
Posts: 1734
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:47 pm

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by CoolColJ » Sun Jun 13, 2010 3:27 pm

Ok it's probably due to the rest of the camera values. I use C4D and Cindigo

I put 1 sphere in to give the camera something to focus on and make the tonemapper work properly
F64 was used here and gives longer flares. The smaller the aperture_radius the longer they become.
I think the rest of camera stuff like sensor width etc is always fixed.
SUN_Flares.jpg

Code: Select all

    <renderer_settings>
        <metropolis>true</metropolis>
        <large_mutation_prob>0.330000</large_mutation_prob>
        <max_change>0.010000</max_change>
        <max_num_consec_rejections>1000</max_num_consec_rejections>
        <max_depth>10000</max_depth>
        <bih_tri_threshold>800000</bih_tri_threshold>
        <halt_time>-1.000000</halt_time>
        <halt_samples_per_pixel>-1.000000</halt_samples_per_pixel>
        <bidirectional>true</bidirectional>
        <hybrid>false</hybrid>
        <logging>true</logging>
        <display_period>60</display_period>
        <image_save_period>300</image_save_period>
        <save_untonemapped_exr>false</save_untonemapped_exr>
        <save_tonemapped_exr>false</save_tonemapped_exr>
        <save_igi>true</save_igi>
        <auto_choose_num_threads>true</auto_choose_num_threads>
        <cache_trees>false</cache_trees>
        <polarisation>false</polarisation>
        <super_sample_factor>2</super_sample_factor>
   
     <splat_filter>
            <mn_cubic>
                <ring>0.333000</ring>
                <blur>0.333000</blur>
            </mn_cubic>
        </splat_filter>

        <downsize_filter>
            <mn_cubic>
                <ring>0.333000</ring>
                <blur>0.333000</blur>
            </mn_cubic>
        </downsize_filter>
 
       <watermark>true</watermark>
        <info_overlay>true</info_overlay>
        <width>800</width>
        <height>600</height>
        <post_process_diffraction>false</post_process_diffraction>
        <aperture_diffraction>true</aperture_diffraction>
    </renderer_settings>


    <camera>
        <aspect_ratio>1.333333</aspect_ratio>
        <exposure_duration>0.050000</exposure_duration>
        <pos>0.000000 0.000000 0.020000</pos>
        <up>0.000000 0.000000 1.000000</up>
        <forwards>-0.913545 0.406737 -0.000000</forwards>
        <focus_distance>20.000000</focus_distance>
        <sensor_width>0.027000</sensor_width>
        <lens_sensor_dist>0.025933</lens_sensor_dist>
        <aperture_radius>0.000203</aperture_radius>
        <aperture_shape>
            <generated>
                <num_blades>16</num_blades>
                <blade_offset>0.200000</blade_offset>
                <blade_curvature_radius>2.000000</blade_curvature_radius>
                <start_angle>0.100000</start_angle>
            </generated>
        </aperture_shape>
        <white_balance>D65</white_balance>
        <autofocus />
        <lens_shift_up_distance>-0.000000</lens_shift_up_distance>
        <lens_shift_right_distance>0.000000</lens_shift_right_distance>
    </camera>
 

   <skylight>
        <sundir>-0.888126 0.393514 0.237443</sundir>
        <turbidity>2.000000</turbidity>
        <extra_atmospheric>false</extra_atmospheric>
        <sun_layer>0</sun_layer>
        <sky_layer>0</sky_layer>
    </skylight>
    <layer_name>
        <layer_name>Sun/Sky</layer_name>
        <layer_index>0</layer_index>
    </layer_name>
  
  <tonemapping>
        <reinhard>
            <pre_scale>10.000000</pre_scale>
            <post_scale>1.000000</post_scale>
            <burn>4.000000</burn>
        </reinhard>
    </tonemapping>
 

   <material>
        <name>defaultMat</name>
        <diffuse>
            <albedo>
                <constant>
                    <rgb>
                        <rgb>0.800000 0.800000 0.800000</rgb>
                        <gamma>2.200000</gamma>
                    </rgb>
                </constant>
            </albedo>
        </diffuse>
    </material>
    <sphere>
        <!--Sphere-->
        <center>-4.000000 1.662572 0.000000</center>
        <radius>1.000000</radius>
        <material_name>defaultMat</material_name>
    </sphere>
</scene>
Attachments
SUN_Flares.igs
(3.95 KiB) Downloaded 187 times

User avatar
CoolColJ
Posts: 1734
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:47 pm

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by CoolColJ » Sun Jun 13, 2010 3:33 pm

Real camera flares when using HDR tone mapping
Attachments
IMG_4949-01_7-01_8-03_small.jpg

User avatar
CoolColJ
Posts: 1734
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:47 pm

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by CoolColJ » Sun Jun 13, 2010 4:04 pm

Fstop 128 will give you really long flares for that sci fi look 8)
<aperture_radius>0.000101</aperture_radius>
Attachments
SUN_Flares2.jpg

User avatar
Ryouta Sumeragi
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 4:11 am
Location: Japan

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by Ryouta Sumeragi » Sun Jun 13, 2010 6:34 pm

In the PostProcess, a big flare becomes interrupted square.
It was heard that 64 bit version was normal. :?
(Because I do not have 64 bit environment, it is not possible to confirm it... )

My environment is WinXP32bit+4GB-RAM and Indigo2.4.4(Cindigo).
...Indigo is used only up to 2GB.

User avatar
CoolColJ
Posts: 1734
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:47 pm

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by CoolColJ » Mon Jun 14, 2010 3:48 pm

I don't use post process, it doesn't look as good.
The flares are not as large the last time I tried it

I used the obstacle map Dag posted earlier in this thread in this render. Looks pretty cool :)
More organic. Might try some finer dot obstacle map to simulate dust and imperfections on lens etc
im1276403182.jpg


now how to get these kinds of rings?

Image

StompinTom
Indigo 100
Posts: 1821
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 3:33 pm

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by StompinTom » Tue Jun 15, 2010 12:23 am

CoolColJ wrote:I don't use post process, it doesn't look as good.
The flares are not as large the last time I tried it

I used the obstacle map Dag posted earlier in this thread in this render. Looks pretty cool :)
More organic. Might try some finer dot obstacle map to simulate dust and imperfections on lens etc
im1276403182.jpg


now how to get these kinds of rings?

Image
Those lens flare rings happen within the different glass elements of the lens. Until Indigo is actually simulating the lens elements, it won't happen. Somebody once made an actual camera with Indigo (modeled the lens pieces + plane to project the image onto) and got some reeeeally cool effects, though the render times were brutal of course.

Great tests!

User avatar
Godzilla
Indigo 100
Posts: 985
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2009 11:33 am

Re: CoolColJ's test pics thread

Post by Godzilla » Tue Jun 15, 2010 12:32 pm

A few tests using Dag's diffraction map, hope you don't mind if I post them here aswell :)
Attachments
Lights.jpg
Sun.jpg
samlavoie.xyz

Post Reply
685 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests