Loading...
> >

.

1…6791112

Comments

  • 3CPO3CPO Posts: 164
    edited May 2024

    .

    Post edited by 3CPO on
  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 42,455
    edited November 2021

    ...what I've seen so farI really like.  it looks much more realistic than many other "seascape" and ocean products I've seen.  peronally, I'm not averse to tweaking settings (I do it all the time) to get the results I need.

    I would love to see how this would enhance the scene below :(of course teh scene would need to be converted to Iray as the original was rendered in 3DL).

     

    Leela Swimsuit Final.jpg
    1250 x 1400 - 1M
    Post edited by kyoto kid on
  • pjwhoopie4801218pjwhoopie4801218 Posts: 795

    Well, what started out as a hobby for you, could literally turn in to the Aquatic Equivelent of "Ultra-Scenery".

    Ultra-Aqua?
    Ultra-Oceanus?

    anyone?

     

  • GordigGordig Posts: 10,816

    Chumly said:

    Well, what started out as a hobby for you, could literally turn in to the Aquatic Equivelent of "Ultra-Scenery".

    Ultra-Aqua?
    Ultra-Oceanus?

    anyone?

     

    Ultramarine?

  • 3CPO3CPO Posts: 164
    edited May 2024

    .

    Post edited by 3CPO on
  • nonesuch00nonesuch00 Posts: 18,878

    3CPO said:

    Hello again!

    Today I worked on a underwater scene trying to match the render output of version 4.12.1.118 to the output of version 4.15.0.30. This is as close as I could replicate it and looks almost the same. Probably with a few more careful tweaks, I could get it even closer. What you have attached are raw untouched renders done in the respective versions mentioned above. There are some differences as well but I think those differences in terms of looks are less important. What surprised me most was the render times!! Version 4.12 rendered the scene twice as fast, in 33m 26s. Version 4.15 rendered it in 1h 5m 34s. Honestly, I did not expect such a huge difference on the part of a newer software, with a newer IRay version implemented, which is supposed to be better. I personally fail to see the progress!

    Granted, the render made in  version 4.12 has some fireflies but looks cleaner and richer colorwise, with better skin color rendition. The render made in version 4.15 seems a bit noisier with darker volume shadows, worse skin color rendition but with almost no fireflies. If you ask me, hard to tell which one I prefer. But what I can say is I would definitely trade some easily removable fireflies for render speed.

    Please let me know what you think, any comments are welcomed. Also, I would like your input weather I should go with a dual version release or stick with just the latest.

    Thank you for your time.

     

    I've always felt iRay renders look better "snowy" but no one else does. laugh

  • nonesuch00nonesuch00 Posts: 18,878

    Chumly said:

    Well, what started out as a hobby for you, could literally turn in to the Aquatic Equivelent of "Ultra-Scenery".

    Ultra-Aqua?
    Ultra-Oceanus?

    anyone?

     

    LOL, Aquafresh laugh

  • PraxisPraxis Posts: 292

    3CPO said:

    Hello again,

    <snip>

    In the meantime, I can concentrate on working on something else, for example on the "deep sea" module of the project, meant to be a complementary addition to the current "shore module".
    I thank those trying to suggest a name for my project, but it was already named, with complete product cover and all...
    So, sadly, sometimes things are as they are...

    Just want to add my voice:  Based on the images you have posted, I would definitely buy both your "shore" module and "deep sea"  module in a flash, regardless of what DAZ Studio version they worked best with.  I would happily install whichever DS version was necessary to get results like that, for the duration of my project.  (I have archived DAZ Studio installers from v4.5 onwards).

    I hope you keep working on this, and that we can buy some of this magic SOON! smiley

  • HavosHavos Posts: 5,705
    edited November 2021

    I am disappointed to hear that the opacity bug has still not been fixed in the latest beta release. The problem of waiting for this issue to get cleared up is we have no idea when that might happen, it could be months or years away. I think the issue was first flagged about a year ago, and I am pretty sure the NVidia engineers are aware of the issue, but I imagine the fix is not easy, or it would have happened by now. Daz Studio has had multiple Iray version releases in the last year.

    Has anyone heard of any rumors of when (or if) this bug will be fixed?

    Post edited by Havos on
  • Write IdeaWrite Idea Posts: 492

    Seriously, do not give up!  You've been putting this project together for over two years.  This product is generating a lot of interest and you've got something here.

    What I would do it partner up with the DAZ team and see if they can help you with your 4.15 problems.  Point the development team to this thread and say it has a lot of interest.  A product that has trapped a consumer base's attention for two years?  DAZ is going to want to dip there toe in this pond (no pun intended...I lied, pun intended).  Who better to help you out with the problem you're facing than the actual creators of the program you're using to create the product.

    You're near the finish line...not the time to quit the race.

    We believe in you!

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 111,745

    Please do bear in mind that product development threads are allowed only on the understanding that the product will be offered to the Daz store - this is not the venue for discussing other options

  • AllenArtAllenArt Posts: 7,175

    Richard Haseltine said:

    Please do bear in mind that product development threads are allowed only on the understanding that the product will be offered to the Daz store - this is not the venue for discussing other options

    Urgh. This place is such a killjoy sometimes. 

  • AllenArtAllenArt Posts: 7,175
    edited November 2021

    I think the OP WAS planning to submit to the Daz store. "Was" being the operative word now sad

    Post edited by AllenArt on
  • 3CPO3CPO Posts: 164
    edited May 2024

    .

    Post edited by 3CPO on
  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 111,745
    edited November 2021

    3CPO said:

    Hope is never totally lost...Checked my ocean project scenes against this latest beta (4.16.1.2) and discovered that, in uber shader at least, even the slightest amount of top coat weight strengh, regardless of the layering mode used, darkens and dulls the overall glossy effect instead of brightening it. Can anyone else confirm this weird behavior?  This might explain the obvious color change in similar surfaces.

    Similarly, using SSS Mono mode effect, found that by comparison with version 4.12, in order to get equivalent effects, the transmitted measurement distance needs to be about 40% higher in the latest beta, kind of the same as in 4.15.

    I asked the developers or anyone in the know in the Daz Studio Discussion thread if the shader will remain as is in the current version of Studio or is it still in the process of debugging and subject to further modifications. I hope someone will answer and clarify so I can decide which path to take...

    Se the last entry in the change log, currently (the only one under the Private Build header) http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dazstudio/4/change_log

    • Implemented a partial workaround for NVIDIA Iray thin-film changes

      • Approximates (does not replicate) the previous behavior

      • Cannot fully match the previous behavior, but does match color characteristics to some extent

      • Affects reflection and transmission - the previous behavior only affected reflection

      • Cannot match three-or-more color variations

    also see the thread on Iray versions https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/529616).

    Post edited by Richard Haseltine on
  • 3CPO3CPO Posts: 164
    edited May 2024

    .

    Post edited by 3CPO on
  • nonesuch00nonesuch00 Posts: 18,878
    edited November 2021

    3CPO said:

    I was told in the Daz Studio Discussion thread that "The change in Iray is deliberate, and will presumably remain, as the old behavior was not physically correct."

    That may very well be, but based on human perception, which of the renders below look to you more "physically correct"? Or just esthetically more pleasing? Can you spot the differences? :)

    ...and I ask myself, rethorically, where is the claimed rendering improvement? And by the way, Studio v.4.16 was not able to render that exact same scene on GPU on my machine.

    The one on the left looks more correct because most any camera would include motion blur from the movement of the water.

    The one on the right the water is like a static prop floating above the beach.

    (had left & right switched backwards earlier)

    Post edited by nonesuch00 on
  • barbultbarbult Posts: 27,612

    I like the one on the left much better.

  • AllenArtAllenArt Posts: 7,175

    3CPO said:even the slightest amount of top coat weight strengh, regardless of the layering mode used, darkens and dulls the overall glossy effect instead of brightening it.

    I noticed this just yesterday as I was prepping a new freebie. Disappointing. 

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 42,455

    ...indeed the one on the left.

  • pjwhoopie4801218pjwhoopie4801218 Posts: 795

    I grew up about a mile from the Atlantic Ocean... and the one on the left looks better to my eye....

    You are probably right to wait until Daz Sorts out its side (Dare I say, Daz5....?)


    That being said...

    UltraMarine is a killer name!  Thanks Gordig!!!!

    UltraMarine:Shoreline
    UltraMarine:DeepBlue
    UltraMarine:Lagoons
    UltraMarine:Hurricanes

    Etc Etc....
     

    We have a winner!

  • 3CPO3CPO Posts: 164
    edited May 2024

    .

    Post edited by 3CPO on
  • McGyverMcGyver Posts: 7,103

    That's pretty cool... we get that around here, but it's not as common as the tiny bioluminescent jellyfish... unfortunately even though there's a little beach area at the end of my street, I haven't been fortunate enough to see them in a number of years... mostly I just snag photos of sunsets...


    But I really like your product and feel it's one of the best I've seen at reproducing the look of a beach environment, or water in general... it's genuinely impressive.

    Keep forging ahead, you've got a great product there!

     

  • 3CPO3CPO Posts: 164
    edited May 2024

    .

    Post edited by 3CPO on
  • pjwhoopie4801218pjwhoopie4801218 Posts: 795

    oooooohhhhh....

    How about a: UltraMarine: Floodwaters

    too cool!

  • 3dLux3dLux Posts: 1,231

    3CPO said:

    Chumly said:

    I grew up about a mile from the Atlantic Ocean...

    ...then I am sure you saw something like this, some of the time at least...

    It will be included as one of the presets...

    It looks like a photograph!  surprise

    On another note, I live in the Philippines and we used to go to beaches every summer up until mid college cool  

  • cherpenbeckcherpenbeck Posts: 1,418

    I would like the dual version, but in the end, I will take whatever you offer, as it is so much better than anything we have now.

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 42,455

    ...⬆This⬆

  • GreymomGreymom Posts: 1,148

    Still very interested in this product!!

  • 3CPO3CPO Posts: 164
    edited May 2024

    .

    Post edited by 3CPO on
Sign In or Register to comment.