Help with difficult indoor lighting

[pixie]

Last idea is to give MLT another try raising the XYZ (forgot Name) value with default of 0.25 up to 0.85 vor higher!
With that you lose the cloudy Boise MLT generates and geht More PT like Boise Ostern, but without any Boxnoise at all.
The overall uniform noise should then be killed easy with neatvide.

Since I'm in vacation, I cant give ya the proper namens for the both options above...

these options are :
- Large mutation Probe
- Max change

in my little experience, I put LMB to 0.51 - 0.7 and max change to 0.06-0.095
it's faster, but up these values the noise are more thick, bigger
maybe more easy for denoising in postpro ? I didn't try

here two images examples i ran in july, watch the name of the files for specifications, the big change is about large mutation probe from 0.78 to 1.78
the speed is multiply by 2, but the noise(s size too, the rendering's time does not change

GPU doesn't use MLT so it won't take thees values into consideration, I guess...

[Zom-B]

Yes, I was refering to LMP!
You should test a inferior and not such a low bounce Studio setup
Also LMP max is 1.0 and same as the other feature, they are MLT only parameters...

[galinette]

MLT is generally a bad idea for videos, the low frequency noise make it flicker a lot.

For the elevator glass issue, one solution would be increasing the glass reflectivity (refractive index) but this changes the final result and you may not want it. The problem is transparency.

[galinette]

Subliminal messages to the devs : there is often a problem with noisy glass when the camera side is well lit (such as exterior, or in this case), and the back side is more in the shadow (such as interior). The importance sampling, I suppose, will highly favor transmission, whereas the contribution of reflection is in fine the largest. Having an option to sample with a probability of 0.5 gives a much better result in this case.

[Zom-B]

MLT is generally a bad idea for videos, the low frequency noise make it flicker a lot.

Using a high LMP value this low frequency noise gets way less!! Give it a try

[galinette]

MLT is generally a bad idea for videos, the low frequency noise make it flicker a lot.

Using a high LMP value this low frequency noise gets way less!! Give it a try

Yes, but I feel you also loose the efficiency of MLT. Is MLT with LMP=1 really more efficient than non-MLT?

[Oscar J]

MLT is generally a bad idea for videos, the low frequency noise make it flicker a lot.

Using a high LMP value this low frequency noise gets way less!! Give it a try

Yes, but I feel you also loose the efficiency of MLT. Is MLT with LMP=1 really more efficient than non-MLT?

The only advantage is that it doesn't have box noise.

[Zom-B]

Yes, but I feel you also loose the efficiency of MLT. Is MLT with LMP=1 really more efficient than non-MLT?

with LMP=1 all benefits of MLT are afaik lost, therefore the sweetspot for animations needs to be found, 0,85 has been find for my last animation...
The big benefit is uniform noise and no boxnoise, both needed to let a temporal denoiser work efficiently, for other scenarios this approach might be not usable.

[Oscar J]

Congrats on the great results zeit.

[zeitmeister]

Thank you very much!!


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

[Originalplan®]

Congrats! Supercool project and final product!
And i'm not even into cars...so.

[zeitmeister]

Thanks to your help guys... great forum, great people!

[Polinalkrimizei]

Pure awesomeness!
Really adds something special to the frontpage.

Are you the only Indigo ambassador at your company?
Fantastic work.