best method for object anim GI?

[Logitek]

in certain scenes such a low number number of sampling rays can

cause problems

Very true, although most of the time, 20 is just fine. But like you said, it all depends on the scene.

I also wish they was a magic preset that would work for all scenes... I'll keep dreaming I guess

[Logitek]

I'll make a quick test in Max with the same kind of scene...

 

Here it is:

www.archimed-studio.com/transfert/Test_STRAT.zip

 

For info (even if these numbers are different in C4D), I used the High-animation Preset with HSph:20 Interp.Samples: 20 Interp frames: 2

Prepass + Rendering.

I left the AA at a fixed rate of 1 for the test.

 

The noise isn't moving, is it? It's actually hard to see with all these moving squares on the floor

[STRAT]

there so little gi definition in there in the first place to tell whether it's flickering or not.

[Logitek]

there so little gi definition in there in the first place to tell whether it's flickering or not.

 

then maybe you should use a different test scene

 

as for your test, make a test that lasts longer and don't make it loop. I'm sure you know that what prepass/rendering does is blending several IR maps together (before and after the current frame rendering). It is normal that throughout the animation, the IR changes... Vray still computes a new IR at each frame, but blends them together at rendertime. If you make your animation loop, of course you will see a "jump" in your GI. But if you play it normally, the GI changes smoothly, which, to me, is not that big of a deal.

 

sorry I thought I was helping making that test render in Max...

[Nils Norgren]

Here are some tests I did when I got back from Siggraph, where Vlado had announced and showed the blended version of the irr map. I should say that these tests were easy to do, but when we went to use the theory with large scenes we have had problems. Irr maps can be large and machines tend to fight for resources and fail, or don't use the maps at all.

 

I don't remember what settings I used for these tests, but i think they were low settings and the render times were in the neighborhood of 8 to 12 min a frame.

 

In a nutshell, the system does work, but in production we have found that we need to use traditional rendering methods to get the effect we need. In the case of a large scene with moving cars, we render out everything except the cars, and then render a pass with the cars only matted with their shadow, sometimes without GI at all, with a light dome(fakeosity).

 

Tricks still seem to be the order of the day, for us there is still no magic bullet (that we have found).

 

Here are the tests, they are not perfect as tests, they were playing around with reactor and a few other things.

 

http://www.neoscape.com/NN_Test/MovingTest_Blend_01.mov

 

http://www.neoscape.com/NN_Test/LogoBuild_01.mov

 

-Nils

[STRAT]

In a nutshell, the system does work, but in production we have found that we need to use traditional rendering methods to get the effect we need. In the case of a large scene with moving cars, we render out everything except the cars, and then render a pass with the cars only matted with their shadow, sometimes without GI at all, with a light dome(fakeosity).

 

Tricks still seem to be the order of the day, for us there is still no magic bullet (that we have found).

 

 

thats basically what we're doing now - rendering the scene or set out as photoreal as possible, then rendering in the anim parts using fakiosity and comping them in later.

 

it's satisfactory, but it would be nice to do it all in one, with respectable frame times.

[Christopher Nichols]

There are basically three methods to do this...

 

The first is the blend method the nils talked about. This is pretty slick, BUT you can loose quality since you are blending. But it will not really flicker if done right.

 

The other (and better way) is brute force. We set our primary to BF and secondary to either LC or BF. don't worry about the subdivs because we take care of all that in the AA. The best example I have of that is this commercial we just did:

 

http://www.swaystudio.com/Sway_Mine_SpyHunter_QT.htm#

Look at the Pontiac "Mine" spot

 

For those wondering about rendertimes these spots were HD so 1920x1080 and it was around 1 to 4 hours a frame depending mostly on things like motion blur.

 

 

Finally there is a more complex method but something that could work really well (not sure if this is supported in C4D). It is a super cool method, but only really works with small objects moving around a large static space.

 

http://www.spot3d.com/vray/help/150SP1/tutorials_anim.htm

[STRAT]

yeah, c4d can do all.

 

unfortunately, the BF as prmaries isn't really an option, as it boosts render times to over 7 or 8 mins a frame. doesn't sound too much, and we even use renderfarms on a daily bases, but when you have deadlines like yesterday with literally 1000's of frames to render you can see my problems

[Christopher Nichols]

I never understand why architecture animation is SO many frames... it seems to be really boring to me. A 30 sec commercial at 24p is 720 frames. A 2 min movie trailer (the longest one gets is) 2880 frames... that is very very long.

[Ernest Burden III]

I never understand why architecture animation is SO many frames... it seems to be really boring to me.

 

Perhaps, but if clients want three minutes, that's what we do. A project can include many spaces and cover a long distance.

 

A feature would be 125,000 - 150,000 frames at min. 4K res, right? That's a lot of frames, too.

 

Thanks for the advice on vray!

[STRAT]

I never understand why architecture animation is SO many frames... it seems to be really boring to me. A 30 sec commercial at 24p is 720 frames. A 2 min movie trailer (the longest one gets is) 2880 frames... that is very very long.

 

completely agree, and we try to 'educate' our clients about it, but hey, if they want good old fashioned never ending flybys then who are we to argue.

[Nic H]

We have been testing animation prepass but found it to be very slow, esp teh more interpolated frames you use. It might be a network issue but something about it is buggering up.

 

What number of interpolated frames are you guys using?

 

Compositing moving objects with camera moves is still the easiest for us and is very quick and flexible. It allows you to get away with lower GI settings (baked) for your camera moves and higher GI (single frame) for your moving objects. More flexiblity in post and quicker if you need to redo something.

 

As far as numbers of frames go in architectural animation most of our shots are within the range of 100-300 frames. In some cases for large moves / camera pullouts we will use up to 1000 frames. Its an easy way to break up a animation by splitting into scenes and makes for a much more engrossing / legible animation if you use shots rather than 1 massive complex camera move. (not to mention easier to manage your scene and redo shots)

[STRAT]

we've come to a conclusion in the vray forum Ernest. The answer is what i suspected all along really.

 

It's basically down to pushing the IR values as high as you can afford, but being clever with it

[Christopher Nichols]

Perhaps, but if clients want three minutes, that's what we do. A project can include many spaces and cover a long distance.

 

A feature would be 125,000 - 150,000 frames at min. 4K res, right? That's a lot of frames, too.

 

Thanks for the advice on vray!

 

Generally features are art directed, have proper storyboard, never cross the line, use editing, involve actors and acting, and 99% of all shot is longer than 200 frames, 75% are 60 or less. They also have large budgets...

 

If clients don't "get it" the best way to educate them is to show them something that has proper editing and a story. To be honest I have seen archviz animation that does do that when I go to events like vizmasters, so I know that it is possible.

 

Also features are rendered at 2k generally. 2048x1556 to be specific.

[Nils Norgren]

Hi Chris, All of your points are well taken, I am a strong proponent of the "Architectural Film" (I hope that ours are some that you are referencing from Vismasters). One of the points you make is essential (in my opinion) that is that for the most part most shots are relatively short, in the case of non-dialog environmental shots, most shots are never more than 5 to 8 seconds (my un-scientific estimate) some are as short as 1 to 2.

 

I implore everyone to pay attention to how often shots cut from one to another, in Film, Television, Commercials, everywhere. Long drawn out camera moves are disorienting and confusing, which are the reason they are a bad choice from the client's side. From a Production side, they are nightmares to light / render / manage / composite / fix.

 

I often try to tell clients that If they require that type of camera move then they are going to pay more for something that, in the end they (and I) will be disappointed with.

 

All that being said, there are clients (who's money is still good) who will fight tooth and nail to have one long, camera move that laboriously travels across a site or down a hall into various rooms. For those stuck in that position I say make them pay for the pain and suffering.

 

Great new spots by the way!

 

-Nils Norgren

Neoscape

[Christopher Nichols]

Hi Chris, All of your points are well taken, I am a strong proponent of the "Architectural Film" (I hope that ours are some that you are referencing from Vismasters). One of the points you make is essential (in my opinion) that is that for the most part most shots are relatively short, in the case of non-dialog environmental shots, most shots are never more than 5 to 8 seconds (my un-scientific estimate) some are as short as 1 to 2.

 

I implore everyone to pay attention to how often shots cut from one to another, in Film, Television, Commercials, everywhere. Long drawn out camera moves are disorienting and confusing, which are the reason they are a bad choice from the client's side. From a Production side, they are nightmares to light / render / manage / composite / fix.

 

I often try to tell clients that If they require that type of camera move then they are going to pay more for something that, in the end they (and I) will be disappointed with.

 

All that being said, there are clients (who's money is still good) who will fight tooth and nail to have one long, camera move that laboriously travels across a site or down a hall into various rooms. For those stuck in that position I say make them pay for the pain and suffering.

 

Great new spots by the way!

 

-Nils Norgren

Neoscape

 

Yeap... a slow paced commercial is around 6 to 10 shots. The pontiac spots we did were around 18 shots (average shot is 1.6 secs).

 

Also the other analogy that you can use (if you are trying to convince your client away from the walkthrough), is to ask him when you see cameras moving forward on films or commercials. This often worked for me back when I did archviz. The answer is you only have the camera move forward generally when the camera represents someone chasing someone else. It is a horror movie thing and generally very sinister. It is usually better to move a camera back and reveal the space around you. When you do that, the space that you have not seen yet is nice and big around you, and the space where you have been becomes small and less important.

 

Lastly, Dwell now has a TV show on the better living channel. In there they do REAL walkthroughs of real spaces. The camera NEVER moves forward, unless, for some reason, they are following a subject that is telling a story about the space.

[Ernest Burden III]

Yeap... a slow paced commercial is around 6 to 10 shots. The pontiac spots we did were around 18 shots (average shot is 1.6 secs).

 

I usually peg shots at 50 - 150 frames, and as in regular films there can be a longer sequence that is cut into smaller parts interspersed with other angles. My experience is that architects will tend to want the more conventional first-person-shooter 'walkthrough'. At least we're making progress in getting clients off 'flythrough's.

 

Also, moving a camera forward should suggest that you, the viewer, are the subject, whereas in a movie you would probably have an actor or object of interest moving and track that. Since arch-vis scenes are often devoid of much of long-term interest, you have to try to involve the viewer a little more in ways that moviemakers usually do not. Its an interesting issue.

 

Somewhat back on topic, the more that is going on in a shot the less we need to worry about perfect GI. It's only when there's not much to hold attention that GI becomes extra-noticeable. Next time you watch a movie with big, amazing effects, try muting the sound and watching an effect over a time or two--you see more 'issues' with the VFX when there's no sound. Lesson to arch-vis'ers? Ambient sounds, even with music.

[Matt Sugden]

it just so happens I am working on another anim with moving objects at the moment.

 

www.virtual-living.co.uk/untitled.wmv

 

and I got to say my lighting solution is aweful messy, I'm a little concerned as my frame times are peaking at 25mins or so, which isn't great. seems to be lots of bright splotches, and noise going on. Any ideas? I'm using 1.47 by the way, so no fancy pre-calc stuff can be done. Doing it all frame by frame brute force.

 

my settings are as follows.....

 

Light cache, medium preset,

hsph subdivs 60

interps 30

 

Light cache 800

sample size 0.004

screen

no. passes 4

pre-filter 10

nearest,

interp 10

 

II'm lighting the scene mostly with 'light materials', which may seem a little odd, but it was the easiest way to get the skylights and light fittings setup with out tons of lights in the scene.

[Lesia4]

Sorry to dig up a thread that seems to have run its course but

 

Christopher Nichols

 

if you're still watching can you elaborated on the Vray settings used in "Mine".

 

Obviously flicker is a constant problem to be overcome (despite what the makers of Vray would have us believe...) and the net is awash with people claiming that the promise of flicker free Vray rendering is a little over sold. While I can understand people's frustration (I've already pulled most of my hair out!) Mine proves it is possible and is the example I point people to when they're starting to lose faith.

 

Also, at 1 to 4 hours a frame, what sort of rendering facilities do you employ?

 

Cheers

Karl

[STRAT]

for anyone interested, i've solved the gi flicker problem in a couple of tutorials giving a few different options to you. it's c4d based, but should translate over to max fairly easily. which ever method used, it's basically into render farm territory. there's no quick solution.

 

http://vrayforc4d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2632

http://vrayforc4d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3125

[thierryg]

Great tutorial Strat!

But I still have a lot of flicker. I tried every methods, and even with BF + LC I have some (a lot...) flickering. I tried using only LC for testing purpose, and the flicker seems to come from the lightcache. Even using 2000 subdivisions doesn't solve my problem and I still have a quite uneven lighting...

Is someone know how to solve this problem?

Do I have to use a smaller scale for example?

[Lesia4]

One thing I've found is that it's much harder to curb flicker if you have any intense lights in your scene. I too am using Start's methods but have found it seemingly harder than I'd expected due to the fact that I have close shots on some fluorescent tubes.

 

Cheers

Karl