general rendering workflows?

[kedojo]

Does anyone have a particular rendering workflow that's efficient and gives solid results?

I often waste time tweaking minute lighting/rendering settings to achieve a nice final rendering.

I probably should think more about the whole texturing / lighting / testing workflow to speed up the entire process. (Work smarter not harder!!!)

Examples: Do you texture objects before you light them? Or do you light to final GI with grey materials - then texture everything. Do you work at very reduced resolution for tests? Higher for details / bump test?

I'm curious to hear what works certain people. I find sometimes I'll get materials just PERFECT - then everything gets thrown off by the lighting scheme...it's a tough balancing act! And sometimes painstakingly SLOW!

Sorry if this is too vague, but I'm looking more for skilled insight than specific technical settings.

[cocolas]

this is an interesting tread!!
I often think about workflow efficiency and wonder what others do.....here's my take on it...from an archviz stand point.

it all depends what I got to start with...if the desinger coming to me knows already what angle he wants to view (talking about a still shot) and has an idea about materials, then things are much easier....

first i decide the camera angle and build what I see in detail (depending how for from the comera stuff is) and rough out the rest behind and to the sides of the camera so I can get decently accurate light bouncing later on...
I then texuture the geometry as I build it (geometry I'll see in the final rendering)......but at this point I don't really care about a finalized material..I just wanna get a good tiling and scale (say if I have bricks on a wall I wanna make sure they are the right scale) and same w/ other mats....
then I procced to set up a rought lighting solution: here I always start with a completly dark scene, and add in lights addictivly: say the sun first to see it's shadows casting..then the artificial lighting if it's an interior..and so on.....see Osmosis's interior lighting tutorial...can't remeber the site url (sorry deja vu )....they have a good lighting work flow.

after that's all in place, I go back to tweak the mats and lighting...i add in relfections/refractions and other mat propreties and tweak the lighting accordingly.......
at this point I need to be able to render a lots of tests fast, even if rough, in order to tweak lighting and mat propreties many times till they all come together...I found natty's test rendering settings really help to get speedy/fast test renderings so that I don't have to wait around too long for these tests...here's his tread:
http://www.chaoticdimension.com/foru...pic.php?t=5967

if it's a composite I set it up so i can render the shadow pass separatly for post comping.....I try to render other passes separatly as well (relfection..etc) if there is time for it ....

however, if the designer doesn't have an idea about camera angle or materials, i try to understand what they wanna show as a priority part of the design and try to set a camera view based on that...the work on the geometry with general colors that have similar tone to what the materials could be in the end, and concentrate on a rough lighting solution....

so in the end, it all depends what you have to start with and go from there...i don't think it's so important what method/flow you use, as it is important to never stop to wait around for the designers...meaning work on parts/phases that you know about and then get back to what was unknown in the begining.....i think having a flexable workflow is the key.

again this is from an archviz point of view...I'm sure workflows change drastically from industry to industry and whether one is part of a large team or working on his/her own.....

phew ...sorry for the long rant

paul

[Seraph135]

I'm sure there are many different workflows out there that all give solid results for a particular person or studio. To answer your questions though...

I often model a rough version of my scene with grey materials and then setup a loose lighting rig that at least resembles what the final one will be. I also try to get my cameras set up at this stage too so that I don't end up modeling and detailing areas I won't end up seeing. Then I finish modeling everything while put it on the appropriate layers for easy scene management and later compositing. Then I texture everything, and finish up by creating the final lighting rig and rendering out passes.

When test rendering I always start by rendering at as low a resolution as I can get away with. Then step things up as necessary by either using region or blow up renders.

[kedojo]

cocolas - Thanks for the helpful and extensive info! - that link to Natty's test settings looks promising.

I agree, one important thing is flexibility. I'm also doing arch/viz, and the client rarely has camera views or materials picked out before I start modeling. In fact, the client usually relies on the rendering to pick the final materials. Sometimes after a final rendering, the architecture changes entirely and I have to go back to square one.

Still, what I'm mainly focusung on is the time spent taking a finished model to a finished rendering (since I model in FormZ, I can't exactly texture as I model).

Let's assume the arch material swatches are decided, and the client picks out the one or two camera views - then it's up to me to quickly produce a finished rendering.

I've tried numerous workflows, and consistantly find myself having to concurrently tweak the lighting and the materials...BUT, I wish the materials were set in stone so I could reliably import them from a master library and just use them on the fly. This would mean that the lighting setup needs to be consistent from one project to the next.

The trap I continually fall into is getting this really nice GI setup, but then I have to adjust my materials which means sitting through LONG GI test renders...if I disable GI for test renders than my material renders are unreliable (again, this is where Natty's test settings may come in handy).

WE'LL SEE - any other workflow ideas are more than welcome!!

[kedojo]

Seraph - yeah, I've found that it's helpful to setup rough lighting on grey object before you do any texturing - almost to serve as a reference like the photographer's 18% grey card trick. Then you at least know that you can use average material brighteness and saturation without having to resort to the output settings on your maps.

The key is getting that rough lighting to resemble your final GI lighting while keeping test render times low enough for further texturing.

[cocolas]

yeah, natty's quick test rendering setups really sped up my testing w/ GI.....


paul.