[REQ] Backface-Culling!

[lycium]

point taken i have some thoughts about how it might work (eg. only splatting the contributions that are some particular distance away from the cam), but these need to be checked for physical consistency. edit: instead of distance-from-cam, a test to see if it's in front of a given plane (or set of planes). this will probably work just fine.

just to clarify, what i was referring to about being unphysical is actually doing backface culling, near-plane clipping etc. - actually changing the scene geometry in a directionally-dependent (i.e. inconsistent) way.

[delle]

point taken i have some thoughts about how it might work (eg. only splatting the contributions that are some particular distance away from the cam), but these need to be checked for physical consistency.

just to clarify, what i was referring to about being unphysical is actually doing backface culling, near-plane clipping etc. - actually changing the scene geometry in a directionally-dependent (i.e. inconsistent) way.

Thank you

It would be nice if all rays would bounce normally, but when they hit the camera (the film) Indigo does this simple check. Where this ray cames from? The point is behind the front plane clipping? Yes-->Discard it...

Donno if it's possible

[pixie]

I think it can be achieved through hacking, surely, but without leaving the pureness of indigo physical consistency and all that philosophical POVs so keen to indigo. If the scene was to be backed onto the objects which is derived from it could then slice the objects without interfering with the correctness of the scene, because it would be kept calculating as if there was no cut, the clipping would be on a layer above.

To sum it up, there is no spoon.

[delle]

I think it can be achieved through hacking, surely, but without leaving the pureness of indigo physical consistency and all that philosophical POVs so keen to indigo. If the scene was to be backed onto the objects which is derived from it could then slice the objects without interfering with the correctness of the scene, because it would be kept calculating as if there was no cut, the clipping would be on a layer above.

To sum it up, there is no spoon.

Ok, I see... But do you have an idea to render a Bathroom like this, with a FOV like the one indicated, with Indigo? Of course I'd like to have the reflection of the door in the mirror

EDIT: At the moment, the only chance I have is to create an aperture into the wall, of course the aperture becomes visible into reflections (mirros, shower's glass,...) and alters the light bouncing. To create a fake aperture into the wall how physically accurate is it?

[lycium]

i spoke with nick about this briefly yesterday and we had a little think about how it can be done. no promises of course but some investigations into such a feature could be done; things are crazy busy at glare, but the issue has been raised and is hopefully on a TODO somewhere

[delle]

i spoke with nick about this briefly yesterday and we had a little think about how it can be done. no promises of course but some investigations into such a feature could be done; things are crazy busy at glare, but the issue has been raised and is hopefully on a TODO somewhere

Thank you very much!!!

[suvakas]

I'm starting a big commercial project on Monday and missing Camera Clipping feature is the only reason why I can't use Indigo. I need to model a large office space and I need to do a rendering from top down without the ceiling being visible. But ceiling should still block the light, cause the sun usually don't shine trough the ceiling. With camera clipping it would be easy to do.
So I also add my REQ for this feature.

[zeitmeister]

+1

[CTZn]

Brain jam, based on suv's case. Ceiling is the "trigged" object:

Code: Select all

if (camera ray hits ceiling first) {
	kill ray;
}
else if (ray hits ceiling) {
	split ray > ray1 ray2;
	ray1 continues contribution;
	ray2 inherits ray trajectory;
	if (ray2 hits camera) {
		sample;
	}
}

It's very presumptuous, but it's working for me

[dmn]

+1!

[CTZn]

But if that was that easy I would be famous and coding Keluxgo

[OnoSendai]

I'm starting a big commercial project on Monday and missing Camera Clipping feature is the only reason why I can't use Indigo. I need to model a large office space and I need to do a rendering from top down without the ceiling being visible. But ceiling should still block the light, cause the sun usually don't shine trough the ceiling. With camera clipping it would be easy to do.
So I also add my REQ for this feature.

That's a pity that you couldn't use Indigo.
Camera clipping / backface culling seems to be one of those horrible hacks that architects really need, so I'll have a look at adding it in after 2.2 stable is done.

[Whaat]

I'm starting a big commercial project on Monday and missing Camera Clipping feature is the only reason why I can't use Indigo. I need to model a large office space and I need to do a rendering from top down without the ceiling being visible. But ceiling should still block the light, cause the sun usually don't shine trough the ceiling. With camera clipping it would be easy to do.
So I also add my REQ for this feature.

That's a pity that you couldn't use Indigo.
Camera clipping / backface culling seems to be one of those horrible hacks that architects really need, so I'll have a look at adding it in after 2.2 stable is done.

If possible, please look into clipping at any arbitrary plane. This should allow SketchUp section cut renders which would be a major selling feature for the SketchUp community.

[suvakas]

That's a pity that you couldn't use Indigo.
Camera clipping / backface culling seems to be one of those horrible hacks that architects really need, so I'll have a look at adding it in after 2.2 stable is done.

Great to hear that !!

[Pibuz]

If possible, please look into clipping at any arbitrary plane. This should allow SketchUp section cut renders which would be a major selling feature for the SketchUp community.

INDEED!