Show Us Your Iray Renders. Part IV
This discussion has been closed.
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2026 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Among other things, the tutorial on supersuit made me realize I could add collision to any object. !!
So I started playing with sphere and torus primitives, though I've found a number of objects do poorly.
http://willbear.deviantart.com/art/Collision-spheres-and-transparency-experiment-556593218
Thanks yeah lots of advantages to lux save render times. I am just a bit tired of being promised "It will be here soon" BS. Sides iray is prolly more the future, I always known that I had to explore it sometime. I was just playing around to se what I can do with the iray draw and came out better then expected. I am exited to learn more...Reading through some threads like tips and tricks for newbies can be painful at times (no offence to anyone) since it can take dozens of postings to get to actual settings...Still thanks for the encouraging comments and tips :)
Bobvan: My big general advice is to set Tone Settings to camera stuff that seems right from looking it up for outdoors or indoors.
Once those numbers are set, then tweak lighting.
When in Iray, it's Render Settings on the righthand tabs, then Tone Setting.
It lists f/stop and a bunch of other things that affect exposure, plus a bunch of other things. I find it helpful to look up 'outdoor scene' or 'indoor scene' and setting the values, THEN worry about how bright the lights are.
I think he meant adjust the Tone Mapping settings in the Render tab for a general infoor or outdoor scene, and then tweak the lights for a good render.
The thing about Iray is that camera settings for Tone Mapping don't translate to anything in the physical world. The f/stop doesn't set DOF (that's done with the camera itself); the shutter speed doesn't control blur (that feature of Iray is not yet supported in Studio), and the film speed doesn't alter the visual qualities of the virtual "film" -- sitting to 4000 ISO doesn't create high grain, high contrast images that you'd associate with a super-fast film.
So, you might as well just set f/stop, shutter, and film speed (or collectively, EV) to some relatively normal values, and adjust the lights for scene balance. The Tone Mapping can then be used for adjustments depending on camera shot, or the overall mood you want, without going back and resetting all the lights.
The Tone Mapping settings also have post-work adjustments normally done in post, such as top and bottom curve levels, and satutation. The one to not change, unless you have a very good reason otherwise, is gamma. Leave that at 2.2.
I tried playing with the tone mapping ion real time and things went really bright or really dark, another area lux has the upper hand. If R4.1 will be as fast as promised it will do really well.. If I understand right everytime one makes tone mappin adjustments the render re starts...
..OK played around a bit more and still no success.
Attached is the setting sans characters to illustrate what I am getting.
The lanterns on the buildings are set to 150W Street lamps at 250W. While I am using a very low intensity Photometric distant light to simulate moonlight (as I am using an HDRI) which yes, would wash out the street light and lantern on the far building to an extent, the lanterns in the shadow should be casting light on the items near them. They are not. Only the bulbs glow. and that is it.
Still not sure what is wrong here and it's frustrating as lighting scenes is usually one of the least of my worries since I worked with it in RL. As this is not 3DL I cannot adjust settings like ray depth to compensate for the glass in the lanterns and streetlight.
(best to click on the image to get a dark background as the white tends to wash things out)
I realize, Tobor, but if you set it to what photographers suggest, your exposure level SHOULD be at a decent value.
I've tried setting lights and then adjust tone settings, but then sometimes stuff is way under-lit but blown out and... enh.
Apparently it didn't in the beta, but it does in the 4.8 final.
If Tone Mapping is something you like to play with, you can output to a canvas (see the Advanced tab, Canvases). Turn OFF Tone Mapping (there's a button), activate the canvas feature, and choose Beauty. Render to the output window, and when you save, D|S will save the basic image file, plus create an EXR that contains at least five stops of exposure range. In an appropriate editing program -- Photoshop CS5 or later will work -- you can then adjust the Tone Mapping to what you want. You don't need to fiddle during the render, restart, fiddle some more, and what-not.
Not all Iray features are available in real time mode, so you always need to do a test render. I do a small one just to get the light balance, then when I think it's close to ready, do the full size output.
Did you apply the thin glass preset to the lantern and streetlight glass?
If not, you are dealing with a glass that is treating the entire volume as if it were solid glass with absorption...as opposed to very thin panes of glass.
Judging by the scale, the lanterns are a good 15 feet off the ground. At only 15o to 250 watts, even with accurate efficacy, they aren't going to cast much of a shadow.
Anyway, try a test render without the glass in the lantern housing -- I am assuming there's glass there, but it's hard to see from your render. Depending on settings, quite a bit of light can be blocked by the glass. You might not even be getting the full 150 or 250 watts.
If things improve, then the settings for the glass in the light fixture may need some adjustment.
PS: Some of your lights look a little cool for this type of scene. Here's a quick roundup of common (though modern) street lighting types, along with their color temperature, and lumens per watt.
I think that's what I said. Or meant to say. Anyway you're approach is right on. Set a reasonable EV for the type of scene it is, go set lights, then fine tune in Tone Mapping.
Photographers (and cinematographers) tend to be pretty lazy, or if not lazy, then have a strong preference for going with what they know. Most of them (and "us"; I used to work in the field in the 1970s and 80s) don't change the camera settings all that much. We know what works, and when there are too many variables involved, the greater the possibility of a ruined shoot. I always tended to shoot within the same few stops -- shutter speed was always 1/60, because we used focal plane shutters in those days, and any faster would not sync with electronic flash.
...I tried it with the glass set to Iray thin glass as well as with the opacity of the glass set to 0 and still got the same results. For the test here I pumped the lantern bulbs efficacy to 50 which as Fishtales mentioned should have lit the place up like "Las Vegas". Others seem to have no issue with getting these lights to illuminate their surroundings using much more "conservative" levels. This is why I'm not sure if there's a setting I am not aware of.
The only thing I can think of is something somewhere is interfering with the mesh lights' ability to illuminate their surroundings.
How did you define the emissive property to begin with? Did you directly apply the Emissive shader, or did you use the Iray Uber shader, then manually crank up the emission color and luminance? Using the Emissive shader resets "competing" values that can distrupt the properties of the emission. It's always a good idea to start from a known.
If it were me, as a test I'd add add a new sphere primitive, size it appropriately, and just add it to the center of the courtyard, outside of any lantern. Take that part out of the equation. Apply the Emissive shader, set the values you want, and raise up maybe 6 feet off the ground. It's always helpful to see the effect of the light against a surface. Try a render to see what happens.
...I applied the emissive shader directly. Once the emissive shader is applied there is no way to remove it (at least that I know of) without reloading the entire set with it's default shaders and having to convert all the surfaces to Iray ones all over again.
I'll try the experiment and see what happens.
Didn't have this trouble with Reality/Lux.
I think I get it LOL screen shots are your friend) so much to learn anyhoo I took it to cs5 and made some adjustments on my bigger monitor. I think for just some quick playing around it did not turn out too bad at all which is encouraging and only 9 mintues to boot. Some of the Reality experience come into play for sure..
If you want to remove emissive properties set emission color to black, fyi
What in PS?
PS stands for Post Script, something we used to use in written letters as an added afterthought. No one writes letters any more, but old habits die hard.
Anyway, I think your revised render is quite good. Nice job for nine minutes. Be honest ... how long would it have taken under Lux?
PS=Photoshop in my lingo LOL. I use DS.I am not naive I know I gots lots to learn. The Reality experience is useful to having to adjust materials. Iray works different which is why its taking me a while to get to play with it learn a new system. We have been getting promises that R4.1 was coming soon since late April so its really hard to know when it will come to fruition. Sides the more options one has the better...Its not really re rendered more like photoshop adjutments for color and contrast
I decided to do a distant view of my last render.
New Arrival 2
...OK first tried the sphere experiment. I created a sphere 10 cm in diameter and placed it at 2.5 meters above the ground (standard overhead light height) and slightly ahead of the characters. Set the luminance to 250 W, left the efficacy at 15, and almost no light on the subjects. A 250 W bulb is actually pretty bright and should have illuminated both the characters as well as the ground and wall that was nearby. I then did the opposite of that Fishtales mentioned and increased the efficacy first to 1,000 which produced the light of about what a 25 W bulb would, then increased it to 10,000 which was maybe about like a 40 W bulb. In my flat I am using compact fluorescent bulbs (about 8 cm in length, 4.5 cm diameter) with an effective light output of 60 W/825 lumens in two overhead light fixtures and they more than sufficiently light the main area where I have my desk with the workstation, far better than the 250 W 10 cm spherical mesh light does in the scene.
Next I did some experiments with one of the lanterns mounted on a wall using the same luminance/efficacy settings. Using either the default glass shader or Iray Thin Glass didn't affect the illumination. Again it appeared as if the bulb produced maybe about what a 40 W bulb would at best. 250 W should have lit most of the surrounding area. as well as one of the figures who was just to the right of it. At 825 lumens (same output as the bulbs I have in my flat), it glowed dimly and didn't cast any surrounding light.
So something still seems amiss here, and I have run out of ideas of what it could be. A mesh light at 250 W (= 2,400 lumens) should illuminate an area just like a 250 W (2,400 lumen) bulb in RL.
Double sided should be off...and about the only other thing I can think of, but it shouldn't have happened on the sphere, the normals for the bulbs in the fixtures are pointing in the 'wrong' direction...
They aren't, at least not in mine, as they are all set to Double Side = off and I never touched anything else.
Here is one I have been working on with some different lighting ideas. Most of the lighting is created from meshes in Blender set as the light source. Doesn't look right yet, but I am having a lot of fun with what iRay let's us do in Daz. Very nice not having to export every time you wanted to render. I still like Cycles better just because of all the after effects you can do, hopefully they keep adding on to the iRay settings in Daz.
Evolution of using collision and such.
First is Wilmap Negligee. Clingwrap city, but cool details, like lace edges and fasteners.
Second is Dynamic burqa dress (of all things) -- drapes much nicer, but only one surface to texture.
Third is the negligee set to collide with the burqa. It took a little testing to get the right position for it, but it came out fantastic.
(I could have gotten the third to cling better with it fit to supersuit or something and adjusting it, but I'm happy with the look, so didn't bother)
In case the watts/efficacy calculations are wonky, maybe try a straight lumens value. If an incandescent bulb has 15 lumens per watt, a 250 watt bulb should put out 3750 lumens. What happens then?
In a scene the size of yours, outside with only dark reflective walls and ground, I'm not sure how much brightness the light will produce. The area of your set is huge.
Especially in 'clear' air...it may as well be a vaccuum for the diffusion going on...or lack thereof. Real air, even in a desert has some water vapor in it that is going to diffuse the light a bit. The light response is somewhat similar to what I'd expect for an outerspace scene...
Fit Control is your friend. It has morphs to handle a lot of the cling problems, and additional adjusters that make up for when a piece of clothing lacks the built-in morphs. It's a bit pricey for the bundle, but worth it, especially if you can snag it while on sale. I recommend it as a core tool.