Procedural clouds

[JonasNöll]

^Lele^ : If I understand correctly that would require 2 renderings, one with clouds and one without and then generating some kind of masks out of the difference from it. Possible, true, but far from ideal. I was rather talking about a clean cloud mask coming straight from the RenderElements, similar like the VRayAtmosphere Render Element.

I found some other issue (not sure if it was mentioned though already). The Size parameter doesn't seem to affect the cloud shadows:

[^Lele^]

kosso_olli here's a sample of professional sport photography, taken today at Spa for the 24h tests.
Notice how deep the sky's blue gets, but also how the (much) higher contrast hopelessly crushes the blacks (in daylight, one would be able to see inside the tyre barrier, under the trees, and even some details inside the car's rims.).
Considering it was taken around midday, with 25C and ~50% humidity, we can assume they didn't spare contrast to try and remove any atmospheric haze.
Ways out of the issue include gradient masks (or, hey, proper masks.) for the contrasting effect, and accurate curve/levels editing to dial in the darks just right.

image credit: SRO Motorsports Group

[seandunderdale]

That pic looks pretty heavily edited, with clarity, and vignette. Ive attached some pics from my Samsung phone which I've tried to turn off as much as I can in terms of internal grading (it obviously still has some). Apart from the eye coping with the contrast better, they do look how it looked in my garden. (The shadows werent as crunchy to the eye.) This is how Id like some of my sky renders to look, so Ill see what I can come up with using the workflows suggested. The darkest blue pics are clearly looking up at the zenith where it is the deepest blue, so Im not going to compare that to lower angles where you can see horizon.

[kosso_olli]

Well, every digital camera still has a response curve applied, even when shooting as raw. The true linear sensor output would look very unpleasant (actually it is not so different from a linear render). What has been done with film in the olden days is now achieved with response curves.

[^Lele^]

That pic looks pretty heavily edited, with clarity, and vignette. Ive attached some pics from my Samsung phone which I've tried to turn off as much as I can in terms of internal grading (it obviously still has some). Apart from the eye coping with the contrast better, they do look how it looked in my garden. (The shadows werent as crunchy to the eye.) This is how Id like some of my sky renders to look, so Ill see what I can come up with using the workflows suggested. The darkest blue pics are clearly looking up at the zenith where it is the deepest blue, so Im not going to compare that to lower angles where you can see horizon.

Look at how crushed the blacks are in your photo as well.
I'd rest my case on it being a case of contrast applied, surreptitiously or overtly that it may be.

[jacksc02]

Loving the clouds! Such a good addition.
I hate to ask for it but some drop down presets would be really handy

[matanov]

Loving the clouds! Such a good addition.
I hate to ask for it but some drop down presets would be really handy

I don't feel that presets are that needed with the current options. What do you have in mind?

[jacksc02]

I was just thinking of percentsge presets for cloud cover.
Clear day 20% clouds
Cloudy day 80% clouds

How about some preset scenes in Cosmos instead?

[matanov]

I was just thinking of percentsge presets for cloud cover.
Clear day 20% clouds
Cloudy day 80% clouds

How about some preset scenes in Cosmos instead?

Template scenes in Cosmos is a really interesting idea

We'll think about the clouds as well, but we plan to add more stuff and then presets will be definitely needed.

[DestinHalfmann]

Hi Guys;

So I am trying to do a gradual blend in of godrays, animating the Fog Transparency.
As you can see in the beginning around 6 sec the environment fog "pops" into existing when the Fog Transparency reaches the standard 96 integer value
Is there a way to avoid this?
If I instead animate the Affect Atmosp. of the Vray sun/sky The sky becomes unaturally dark when the effects is set to 0, which is to be expected.

[DestinHalfmann]

Hi Guys;

So I am trying to do a gradual blend in of godrays, animating the Fog Transparency.
As you can see in the beginning around 6 sec the environment fog "pops" into existing when the Fog Transparency reaches the standard 96 integer value
Is there a way to avoid this?
If I instead animate the Affect Atmosp. of the Vray sun/sky The sky becomes unaturally dark when the effects is set to 0, which is to be expected.

Also,

The "pyramids" are ca 500 m wide and 250 m tall. Cloud height is 700 m and thickness is 100 m
The shadows do look a little clamped. But maybe that is to be expected at this distance with such heavy cloud coverage?

[justini]

Been waiting for this feature for such a long time, so thank you. A couple of observations and suggestions:

1) Currently the sky is limited to a single cloud layer + cirrus. A layer function allowing for multiple layers of clouds would be more versatile and realitic.... each with unique heights, density and phase parameters.
2) Cirrus layer is not adjustable or animatable via phase parameter. Can this be added? Currently is feels like a static 2D element only.

any response to this post?

[matanov]

any response to this post?

We are reading all comments and suggestions Everything proposed here will be considered for the next phase of development, but we can't promise anything for now.

Thanks for the feedback!