Indigo Renderer Forum

Yep. As I said it's a commissioned project. I will install the lamp in about three weeks in the Autodesk offices in Lake Oswego in Portland, Oregon.

I have moved 99% of my mechanical engineering to Fusion 360 because it's free for startups ( although I do own a license) and because it runs natively on a Mac and because it has some very promising concepts and features. For example try to create a T-Spline and add parametric mechanical features to it in any other software.






Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Nefertiti bust:

See http://nefertitihack.alloversky.com/

I added STL support so I can read the file.

Very cool Nick. Polycount?

Added STL to what? Skindigo?

Oscar J wrote:Very cool Nick. Polycount?

Added STL to what? Skindigo?

Just over 2M tris I think. I wrote a little more about it here: http://www.indigorenderer.com/content/nefertiti-bust

I added STL support to Indigo, e.g. Indigo can now load STL files directly, much like it can load OBJ files.

Hello guys,

I have a doubts about something, I have some flake artefacts in my scene only onto few leaves of trees.
I think this appear only on the leaves normal compared to the sun disk.

All leaves are in double sided thin material with diffuse material as sub mat (same in front and back)

I think it is because of the value of the roughness (front) I put 0.004.

It means any sens for you?

(5000 spp close-up)

Roughness of 0.004 is way too low. That's like a mirror.

In indigo, roughness doesn't go from 0 to 1 unlike in other renderers.
Roughness of 0 means it's a mirror, while higher values mean increasing roughness, getting closer to diffuse.

PureSpider wrote:In indigo, roughness doesn't go from 0 to 1 unlike in other renderers.
Roughness of 0 means it's a mirror, while higher values mean increasing roughness, getting closer to diffuse.

Actually it does for double-sided thin.

Thank you, of course it is better like that

Looks quite photorealistic actually, but could use more contrast IMO. Or maybe this is just the look you're going for?

Just a very simple exercise to see how V4 would perform compared to the latest V3. about 15% more samples per second with BIDIR MLT.

The caustics turned out nice enough to hopefully qualify for a simple rendering

The caustics are super pretty!

Thanks! The trick to nice caustic are many small light sources. As I was too lazy to set all that up myself I used the St.Peters dome light probe from here :

http://www.pauldebevec.com/Probes/

For the ring I used the ruby material from the mat db.The rest was done by Indigo.

Did a test with the new GPU render mode, rendered for 12 min on two GTX 960. had to raise supersampling to 8 to get rid of the fireflies.

Nice! When do we get to see this without watermarks?