Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.Daz 3D is part of
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
I did, as I wanted to be sure that my interpretation was correct. While it's not got any specular or glossy reflections, it was visibly still affected by the light sources in the scene I tried.
Ok, that is what I was thinking may still be the issue. I tried running it with a small 'm' at the end and it was all fireflies similar to the one you put.
Shane, since you have Octane why don't you use the Diffuse (Beauty) from Octane? That will get you what you need.
I have Octane, but haven't used it in years. I bought it as a DAZ / 3D newbie and was overwhelmbed by its complexity vs. Iray.
However, lately I've begun to wonder if it's time to make the leap back. It's a superior renderer, even if it does take some time to convert MDL to Octane materials.
Do you mean version 4.04 vs 4.02?
I have 4.02. Like you, I bought it for $600.
It's 2018.1.3.44 from this link:
https://render.otoy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=71080
Ah, thanks. I'll check that out tonight.
Is this better than the denoiser that is in DS 4.11.0.383?
Many say the Intel version is better.
In my opinion, yes. Personally, I feel it gives better results, but even if that is subjective, denoising as a subsequent step is a non-destructive process that allows you to mask the original and denoised layers in Photoshop to taste.
This test image of mine (not explicit, but still somewhat NSFW) was layered from the results of three different sets of denoising parameters and a few percent of the original image (to stop it looking unnaturally clean).
As it's been done, it's not particularly contentious that custom 3DL shaders are at least somewhat viable for the purpose, but it's stil both less convenient and more time consuming than if it were possible to render it as an Iray canvas.
The Iray to 3DL Albedo script I've contrived is at least broadly functional at the moment, although not exactly devoid of the need for tweaking; there's certain materials that are consistently problematic, most notably Cornea and EyeMoisture becoming opaque white, and it'd be nice if I could figure out how to get the script to recognise these material names and automatically apply fixes.
If I can't figure that out, I'll still release the script as is (for which I now have permission), but it will mean a bit more tweaking required.
We need both the albedo and displacement buffers to retain details with a denoiser. As far as I can see iray can't output either. And the 4.11 denoiser itself works only on the beauty canvas so it does lose details as well.
As I see it iray has too many flaws to be considered a production ready pbr engine. It has issues with objects far away from the world center, then it doesn't support motion blur, then it doesn't support a real denoiser, then it is fairly dumb and brute force as far as vram and gpu usage are concerned.
My personal choice is to export to blender then use cycles or eevee depending on the project needs. Then I like iray anyway for still pictures in small scenes where it works fine enough, but then gimp or photoshop may be needed to add effects.
Hi! Don't know, who will need this, but I created a simple programm for DeclanRussell, IntelOIDenoiser.
It generates a batch file for image sequence.
links - https://github.com/DeclanRussell/IntelOIDenoiser
https://github.com/denesco/IntelDenoiserBatchCreator
Intel Denoiser update:
July 29, 2019: Version v1.0.0 now released on GitHub
New release version 1.0.0 is now available on the Open Image Denoise GitHub page.
Happy Denoising!
Nice! I was wondering if / when there'd be an update.
Is there a way to integrate this into the command-line item?
For those who haven't found it yet, an updated v1.2 command line tool has been uploaded that uses the updated OIDN version: https://github.com/DeclanRussell/IntelOIDenoiser/releases
I'll be giving it a shot in a moment to see what the difference is like.
EDIT: Short version - not impressed. On the test scene I've just tried, the denoising has noticeably more artefacts than the old version (akin to a poor quality JPEG, despite using various combinations of PNG and EXR input files), so I will be sticking with the OIDN 0.8.1 version for now.
Hmm. Matt, I suggest you give it another try. I've noticed definite improvement myself!
Both of these are done with the same PNG beauty canvas, and a PNG albedo rendered in 3Delight. I also tried with EXR files, with the same result.
This, done with the updated version (upscaled 200% to make it clearer):
has large amounts of artefacting along the silhouette of the arm. Also, as compared to the older version, less detail is retained on the wall behind:
I noticed the artefacting in the top image almost immediately, but I can't think of any circumstance where I had any artefacting that I actually noticed using the older version, so the new version showing this artefacting at all is a very bad start. (And even if we assume it's just something about this image, I render quite a lot of similar interior scenes, and rely heavily on the denoiser to render them in a reasonable time frame).
I'm focusing on that mainly because I mostly use the Beauty+Albedo denoise pass, but as far as the other passes - the artefacting is somewhat less prominent when no albedo canvas is offered, but there's still noticeable dark banding along the edge of the arm, akin to an badly done unsharp mask. It's a bit more of a two-horse race when it comes to using an albedo and a normal canvas, but while the new one is maybe slightly less noisy in some areas, it also loses more detail. As I usually mask this pass in only in specific areas that need the extra detail (because Iray's pretty noisy normal canvases mean this denoise pass is pretty noisy)m, that also something of a net loss.
Based on the above (and yes, I have definitely got them the right way around - the top one is the new denoiser), would you honestly upgrade? The older version has never shown any similar problem.
Thanks for the comparison, Matt. I honestly haven't noticed any banding / artifacting. Could you show us what the source image looked like? Typically, mine are fairly converged and I only use the denoiser to get rid of the pesky noise in shadows.
I don't use beauty / albedo because getting it from Octane is a pain in the rump.
I still have the previous version on my system as well. I'll try to conduct a few tests myself and post the results.
Interesting, the top one looks like more real/detailed because I can see arm hair, the bottom one, there is none. (but maybe that is my eyes interpreting something as arm hair?)
Blender 2.81 is going to add the intel denoiser too. The difference is that blender does pass the albedo and normal buffers. While daz studio doesn't.
https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Reference/Release_Notes/2.81/Cycles
Beauty:
Admittedly, not the most converged image, at only a little over 2000 samples in an interior scene, but across the whole 2880x1800 image from which this is cropped, that's still most of five hours rendering on my fairly low end card. Past experience is that the V0.8.1 denoiser can cope with this level of noise reasonably well, if it's also fed an albedo.
(Also, it's relatively few samples just because of the whole thing about rendering reasonably large and sizing down just seeming to give better results for the same total render time).
For the sake of comparison, so you can see what detail is actually supposed to be there, the albedo:
There is no arm hair in the render. While I do have body hair products, the character in question is a slightly modified G8F conversion of the rather stylised P3D Yumi, so mega-realism wasn't really the aim.
Also, I'm still learning what the memory usage is like on this new version of DS/Iray, and one of the main things that seems to cause my card to drop to CPU is too much geometry memory usage; I'll definitely need to test how well thousands of individual hairs hold up on my card and this new version, but I want to do it on a scene that will be less time consuming to restart if it drops out.
I am trying to use the Drag N Drop tool but it simply launches the settings. Any idea what I'm doing wrong? I've set the directories to the Nvidia and Intel denoisers
use chdir in cmd prompt and select dictionary where Denoiser.exe is then type Denoiner.exe -i [ ] -o [ ] and enter
I just tried this out, with the registry edit right-click (thank you for that!) and it's amazing! This is especially handy for me as I can't ever seem to get the in-render denoiser to kick in. I think it's because I render such heavy scenes to begin with, they barely fit on my GPU and the denoiser won't kick in because it's right at that cusp. Again...thank you thank you!
I haven't been able to get this to work, same issue as described above, when I drag-and-drop into the DnD program it just opens the settings.
Nevermind. Great program!
For others who haven't figured out the DragNDrop tool: run the program and then drop the pictures onto the program window.