Violet for 2.0+...?

Godzilla · Post by **Godzilla** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:13 am

Any news if there is going to be another Violet update? it is a very useful program, and it would be nice if we could use it with 2.0+ versions.

psor · Post by **psor** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 9:02 am

I'd love to see a new Violet too. With camera tonemapping. ;o))
I wrote the guys from qtpfsgui an mail and asked to support
the igi file format. No reply till now tho. I miss Violet! ;(

take care
psor

Post by **fused** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 9:17 am

Yes, that would be awesome. Indigo can do that, btw... well sort of...

After you stop rendering it keeps the igi in memory so you can tonemap it. Maybe all that has to be done is to build some way in to load a igi without a scene?

Post by **OnoSendai** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:25 am

The current Indigo GUI does interactive tonemapping just fine.

iacx · Post by **iacx** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:32 am

How does it simulate the effect bloom without violet?

Post by **OnoSendai** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:40 am

iacx: Use aperture diffraction, it's much more realistic.

iacx · Post by **iacx** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:45 am

Thanks Ono

!

psor · Post by **psor** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:55 am

OnoSendai wrote:The current Indigo GUI does interactive tonemapping just fine.

Could you please add a "Open IGI" kinda entry to the menu, so we are able to tonemap the
image and play with the light groups later on. That would rock!

Thanks in advance.

take care
psor

Post by **OnoSendai** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:03 am

Hi Psor, you can achieve the same effect by resuming the render. But yes, I will add that to the menu.

Post by **fused** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:08 am

not everyone keeps igs files forever

psor · Post by **psor** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:13 am

fused wrote:not everyone keeps igs files forever

That's true, non the less I keep them longer then I've Indigo open tho. ;o))

OnoSendai wrote:Hi Psor, you can achieve the same effect by resuming the render.
But yes, I will add that to the menu.

The difference might be, that I changed the .igs or deleted it. Thanks!

take care
psor

Post by **OnoSendai** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:19 am

interactive tonemapping relies on the IGS file because the aperture diffraction parameters are in the IGS file. So there will be a bit of work to get around this, but It can be done I guess.

psor · Post by **psor** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:30 am

Ohaa, I understand. I hope it's not to much work for you. It wasn't my intention to do so.
Then probably it's better to keep the .igs tho.

take care
psor

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:03 pm

OnoSendai wrote:interactive tonemapping relies on the IGS file because the aperture diffraction parameters are in the IGS file. So there will be a bit of work to get around this, but It can be done I guess.

I would suggest to alter the .IGI file-format in way, that (something like) an EXIF header with all the relevant informations will be added to it.

pixie · Post by **pixie** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:34 pm

Phoenix wrote:
OnoSendai wrote:interactive tonemapping relies on the IGS file because the aperture diffraction parameters are in the IGS file. So there will be a bit of work to get around this, but It can be done I guess.
I would suggest to alter the .IGI file-format in way, that (something like) an EXIF header with all the relevant informations will be added to it.

+1

Violet for 2.0+...?

Violet for 2.0+...?

Re: Violet for 2.0+...?

Re: Violet for 2.0+...?

Re: Violet for 2.0+...?

Re: Violet for 2.0+...?

Re: Violet for 2.0+...?

Re: Violet for 2.0+...?

Re: Violet for 2.0+...?

Re: Violet for 2.0+...?

Re: Violet for 2.0+...?

Re: Violet for 2.0+...?

Re: Violet for 2.0+...?

Re: Violet for 2.0+...?

Re: Violet for 2.0+...?

Re: Violet for 2.0+...?

Who is online