about colorbleed IRL

[Dschaga]

Just a little fact of real world for the colorbleed discussion:

It's a carpet designed by Franz West for a Mozart exhibition(what else?) in the Albertina in vienna



The image can't show you the real colors, because the colorbleeding is much stronger IRL but you can guess why the color bleed is so strong.
The ceiling is not directly lighten by any light, so there is no chance to see the ceilingcolor but only the diffuse reflection of the carpet.

[Da_elf]

so what your saying is for all the trouble that we try to get rid of color bleeding infact its all perfectly natural?

[RErender]

RL is not necessarily pretty

I would expect a real photographer to add some fills to the ceiling to reduce the bleed.

Nice ref though

[Da_elf]

yeah i used to photograph interiors a while back and we used to use softbox's to help light the place. we never tried with natural light

[cpnichols]

yeah i used to photograph interiors a while back and we used to use softbox's to help light the place. we never tried with natural light

Yeah... tell that to the maxwell people that think all you need is to add the normal lights and you are done. To take good photographs you need to play with a lot of lights.

[cpnichols]

Re: about colorbleed IRL

The image can't show you the real colors, because the colorbleeding is much stronger IRL but you can guess why the color bleed is so strong.
The ceiling is not directly lighten by any light, so there is no chance to see the ceilingcolor but only the diffuse reflection of the carpet.

BTW... at first I though this was an image showing the new physical camera in Vray... nice bulge on that lense. Hehe... then I was going to make comment on to much artifacting where the corner of the walls and ceilings...

Hehe... I may use this in may lecture at gnomon tomorrow... do you mind?

[Da_elf]

i was thinking the bitmap filtering was bluring the texture too much

[dlparisi]

The carpet bitmap is also tiling really bad IMO.

[Dschaga]

ok the picture above was a (too) fast remap with flexify from a fisheye, because the image is part of a fullscreenqtvr..anyway i can do that better:



some quotes now:

The carpet bitmap is also tiling really bad IMO.

that's a good one! *g*

i was thinking the bitmap filtering was bluring the texture too much

also very funny, but anyway the carpet is an instalation from franz west.. so there are reasons .. it looks at least very impressive in this very huge room

BTW... at first I though this was an image showing the new physical camera in Vray... nice bulge on that lense. Hehe... then I was going to make comment on to much artifacting where the corner of the walls and ceilings...
Hehe... I may use this in may lecture at gnomon tomorrow... do you mind?

i don't know how that first image could happens *g* , maybe it's a mixture of "not my machine and bad tft" ..but if you want you can use the 2nd picture.

yeah i used to photograph interiors a while back and we used to use softbox's to help light the place. we never tried with natural light

We all used filllights in the past not even on the set but also in 3d ..but now ppl without any knoledge about light can do impressive renderings with GI ..so it's the question if you want to use Sky/GI or still have the full controll of your image ..i personaly really like the scanline renderer now... you know it's much fast then vray

anyway..it's a good ref ..so that's why it's here

[RErender]

We all used filllights in the past not even on the set but also in 3d ..but now ppl without any knoledge about light can do impressive renderings with GI ..so it's the question if you want to use Sky/GI or still have the full controll of your image ..i personaly really like the scanline renderer now... you know it's much fast then vray

In many cases that is simply not true. A fully furnished image with a lot of raytrace reflections or even ref maps can take just as long as a nicely rendered scene with v-ray. Add the heavy geometry we are all getting used to and scanline will really bog down. Add again object motion blur and... well I have never completed a scanline render with object motion blur.

There is still a time and a place for fill lights even with GI. So the talent is not lost.

I still do use scanline but only for rendering mattes, sprites and occasionaly particles with motion blur but newer versions of V-Ray support MB of particles so those days are short.

[jow]

it looks to me like the walls and ceiling are slightly reflective. look at the left hand wall, theres a definite line where the pink stops and a bluey/grey starts
but i have been known to be wrong

back in the days of scanline some heavily populated tree/plant scenes probably took as long as they do now using GI/vray...

[trixian]

it looks to me like the walls and ceiling are slightly reflective. look at the left hand wall, theres a definite line where the pink stops and a bluey/grey starts
but i have been known to be wrong

back in the days of scanline some heavily populated tree/plant scenes probably took as long as they do now using GI/vray...

Just as a side note to this.
All materials\surfaces in RL are reflective. That is why you can see them. There is no such thing as specular versus diffuse\ambient in nature. Its all reflections\refractions. Actually, most materials have slight refractive qualities as well, and can be easily obseved if one bothers.

Right. Back to the topic.

[jow]

yeah,know what your are saying....just making an observation,with your quote strenghting it

[Da_elf]

so i guess the jist here is lets color bleed the hell out of all out renders and call it artistic liscence hehehe