Fstorm render

[vlado]

In simple words, I would like to set my colour mapping type as Linear multiply, but then have the Reinhard as a Correction Control in the VFB where I would adjust the burn value, then save that as a .cube file(or whatever). This is the most important aspect for me.

But you can already do that!? What else do you want? There are already exposure and burn values in the VFB and you can save a .cube file out in the latest two SPs.

And a more advanced color mapping would be the Filmic tonemapping(implemented the same way as described above) which I've been banging on about for quite some time

Which of the three or four different flavors of filmic tone mapping do you have in mind?

Best regards,
Vlado

[Vizioen]

Filmic tonemapping(implemented the same way as described above) which I've been banging on about for quite some time

Hear hear

[mitviz]

Honestly what to take of it is that well fstorm is really nice to use and the tonnemapping saves alot of post processing work, i have been testing it and getting really nice images without the need for any photoshop at all. It has also made me look more into gpu rendering, so far i have not been able to get good performance from vray rt but with my crappy card its working better with fstorm, idk why it just is, but as for gpu rendering, i just like the fact that graphics cards are nicely priced these days and getting more affordable and powerful and i can simply buy a new card and stick it in and have double, tripple or in my case 5 times the power of one card without the need for a new pc and expensive costs. before i was stuck with just using the cpu rendering and not paying any much attention to gpu rendering but i am now looking to get a few 1080 and soon the ti versions when they drop for use with gpu rendering with vray and fstorm. Here are two images i recently worked on in my spare time as practice, only chromatic aberation was added in photoshop and an lut was use in fstorm and at 20 percent strength which is nice to be able to blend in the lut with the original image which we need in vray. All these engines are powerful even the young fstorm but it misses alot of features but its very usable at the moment and i think as time goes by all these engines will end up on the same level one day. So for the near future Vray is stil king but new kids on the block have fresh blood and have been getting alot of attention

[squintnic]

photoshop, nuke or fusion?
there is a reinhard node in fusion thats good

[peteristrate]

Ok, so what's the status with this ?
Is there any good ideas to take from Fstorm or other render engines(i.e. Octane) and implement it in Vray ?
I do, personally, think as well that Vray needs an enhanced tonemapping.
I've been raised this point to developers, but I haven't got an answer whether this will be something to be looked at or not.

Now, I know that vray offers a lot of flexibility when it comes to tonemapping: you can do with curves whatever custom tonemapping you want. But, the problem with curves is that, manually, you cannot achieve any accurate realistic behaviour. You just have to guess things around.

To get a natural / realistic tonemapping, you would have to set your colour mapping type as Reinhard, but then that would be embedded into the image - which I don't want since I need the 32 bit linear render for post.
So, I need to have the Reinhard applied on top of my linear render but as an LUT that I can adjust and that I can save as a file to be imported afterwards in post.

In simple words, I would like to set my colour mapping type as Linear multiply, but then have the Reinhard as a Correction Control in the VFB where I would adjust the burn value, then save that as a .cube file(or whatever). This is the most important aspect for me.
And a more advanced color mapping would be the Filmic tonemapping(implemented the same way as described above) which I've been banging on about for quite some time

[jstrob]

Ok just found the V-Ray LUTs Explorer! cool thanks to Lele!

http://forums.chaosgroup.com/showthr...ghlight=lut%2A

[jstrob]

I don't understand what all the hype is about tonemapping and LUTs and glare

Just because they are the most noticable difference between those 2 renderers. Maybe we can do some in V-Ray too but they should be make more known (LUT) or accessible (real time LUT switching) or improved (glare).

where can we get that Lele's LUT switcher tool? Sounds interesting!

[jstrob]

Hopefully they make it in court, its nice software to use.

Mr. Kozlov said he just used indirectly some of his own ideas that were in the 3ds max plugin (that he did himself alone for Otoy when he was working there). So if it is really indirect he should be ok. One of the evidence he showed probably supplied by Otoy is circling the render button and the motion blur duration setting... which are common to all renderers. Very smelly law suit!! In that case chaosgroup could also sue Otoy I'm pretty sure they used the render button and motion blur duration before Otoy.

Otoy should focus on their own development instead of suing someone like that.

Anyway, all of this is always just profiting the lawyers. If they really wanted to remove some code from fstorm max plugin they could have done it outside of court. It just seems like they want to destroy fstorm.

But we'll see when more details emerge.

[mitviz]

Hopefully they make it in court, its nice software to use.

[glorybound]

Oops! There goes FStorm

So apparently FStorm developer has been accused of copyright infringement by OTOY (Octane) claiming he used octane's source code to develop FStorm... Don't know what will happen with Fstorm now but one thing is for sure (from fb comments) - "OTOY is faster at filling lawsuits than they are at fixing their software."

[dlparisi]

In the one on the left I think it may be mix of depth and and reflect on back side option for the shader. On the right probably depth.

FStorm has depth at 8 by default, RT at 5.

I'm not sure either is the reason actually (maybe the double highlight in the first image). If you look at the images on page 5 (the link at the end of my post) those were done with th regular adv renderer with the ray depth matched in each case and reflect on back side on for vray. In those you still see clear doubling of some of the highlights. Again, I'm not sure which is correct - the double highlights may be incorrect.

[leo.surrealismo]

octane just filled a lawsuit again fstorm renderer for copyright infringement.

[Moriah]

So apparently FStorm developer has been accused of copyright infringement by OTOY (Octane) claiming he used octane's source code to develop FStorm... Don't know what will happen with Fstorm now but one thing is for sure (from fb comments) - "OTOY is faster at filling lawsuits than they are at fixing their software."

[wyszolmirski]

In the one on the left I think it may be mix of depth and and reflect on back side option for the shader. On the right probably depth.

FStorm has depth at 8 by default, RT at 5.

[dlparisi]

One thing I've noticed in comparing the images is that Fstorm has a tendency to produce additional specular highlights compared to v-ray given identical lighting conditions. The second image set below seems to be getting a highlight off a highlight from the vase below rather than a light source. Fstorm left, Vray right...

Why is this? Is it simply a reflection depth issue or something else going on? BRDF differences? I don't think it makes the images any more photorealistic but it's something I've noticed on more than just the two images above.

FYI: you can also see the extra speculars in this set of images....http://forums.chaosgroup.com/showthr...271#post701271