V-Ray 3.30.01 BETA! available for download

[AtlJimK]

Use the physical exposure control instead.

Best regards,
Vlado

Ok, but I lose the ability to control the white balance and I have only one variable, EV. No independent shutter/aperture for DOF.

[kosso_olli]

Excellent news, I love it!
I've always wondered though if theres a possibility or a way to use the VRayEdgesTex's rounded corner feature on CAD meshes which have a lot of internal triangles? WIll it work on only the outer edges somehow?

Here are some images.

The real wheel:



The delivered geometry. Notice that there are two parts: The rim itself and the machined face. No fillet between them, just the sharp edge.



Geometry rendered as is. Very flat and dull looking.



The result with the new VrayEdgeTex. Straight out of the box, no additional modifactions. It even works between two different materials.



It's magic, really!

[^Lele^]

Thanks for the tip, but they already are at 0,6 and 0,5. Anyway, the VRaySampleRate shows that Vray are sampling the highlight most, and trying to troubleshoot an Evermotion scene might not be the best to do in this thread. I think I will redo the material and see whether that change anything.

It's actually very good that you brought it up.

I was tampering with another Evermotion scene, and ran into the oddest of behavior.
It was due to the fact that some scene is VERY old (early vray 2.0, some even 1.x), and most of those have NON-LINEAR color mapping and gamma baked into the renderer, sub-pixel mapping AND image clamping active, and as a result both light intensities and material setups are everywhere but where they should be.
However, highlights are muted compared to the lights shining on them, and the render is quicker, if totally skewed.

For some of those scenes, it's obvious and quick enough what should be done to linearise them, for some, they're too far gone to be fixed, they'd have to be re-authored, and would look different.

It was the same for all other VRay versions, but since this time you're all going to use default settings to begin with, remember that the DEFAULTS ARE LINEAR.

This is strictly ME speaking, but if i was a user, i'd forget about touching that part again, and concentrate on more lifelike shading and lighting (which often avoids fireflies in and of itself, when done properly) under strict LWF rules.
I may be preparing a short tutorial to show what scanned materials do, versus some of the usual principled (ie. hand-made) shaders of the same stuff: to give you an idea, the reflectivity amount for average glasses is between 5 and 20% (not the usual white-ish!), the albedo for most metals is between 30 and 60% (albedo is the sum of both diffuse and reflection/spec), and so on and so forth.
That translates in energy not dissipating well at all, and VRay ends up trying to trace paths which not even real life sports, so to speak...

[WilleViz]

It's actually very good that you brought it up.

I was tampering with another Evermotion scene, and ran into the oddest of behavior.
It was due to the fact that some scene is VERY old (early vray 2.0, some even 1.x), and most of those have NON-LINEAR color mapping and gamma baked into the renderer, sub-pixel mapping AND image clamping active, and as a result both light intensities and material setups are everywhere but where they should be.
However, highlights are muted compared to the lights shining on them, and the render is quicker, if totally skewed.

For some of those scenes, it's obvious and quick enough what should be done to linearise them, for some, they're too far gone to be fixed, they'd have to be re-authored, and would look different.

It was the same for all other VRay versions, but since this time you're all going to use default settings to begin with, remember that the DEFAULTS ARE LINEAR.

....

Thanks for bringing this up, Lele. You're right, some of these Evermotion scenes are old and trying to troubleshoot them is not always the most sane idea.

Anyway, the leaf material with the issue is "just" a green diffuse bitmap and a opacity map (and a bump bitmap I disabled), so I would just bring it up if other had the same or there had been a bug with the max intensity or something along those lines.

[^Lele^]

It could be the way opacity gets calculated.
Make doubly sure the right channel (alpha?) pipes through the opacity map channel: i had issues with glowing stuff before when i passed odd data (rgb) to the opacity unintendedly.
Or shoot me an email with a sample of the shader (so no moving of copyrighted stuff.) and i'll check it out.
If you use the "send mail" option from my profile in the forums, you'll reach me at my chaosgroup.com address.

[glorybound]

Is there a way to add minutes to a progressive render? I see that my 60 minutes will not be enough, so I would like to add 60 more minutes. I know I can set it 0 0, but too late now.

[^Lele^]

Resumable rendering isn't doable directly in VRay as of yet, no.
There would be ways to actually manage something like that right now, but they are somewhat convoluted and would require some nuke (or custom exe/code).
For now, it's always best to leave a render (particularly a still!) without any time limit, and you'll be able to stop it whenever you'll please (unless it decided it had to stop by noise threshold).

[vlado]

Resumable rendering is on the "to do" list

Best regards,
Vlado

[glorybound]

I wanted a cut off time to see if my PSD Manager would work. No worries, I'll work around it.

Bobby Parker www.bobby-parker.com

[glorybound]

It's strange that the default is 1 minute and that GI isn't turned on by default. Maybe progressive at 0 and BF+LC on for GI by default. New users would not have to do anything.

[vlado]

Yes, we'll probably change those defaults.

Best regards,
Vlado

[glorybound]

Does allowing V-Ray to handle subdiv's handle the light subdiv's, too?

[vlado]

Does allowing V-Ray to handle subdiv's handle the light subdiv's, too?

Yes.

Best regards,
Vlado

[Morne]

Not sure if this is specific to the BETA or not (since it's the 1st time I'm giving progressive a go).

I've noticed at the end of a render, the VFB looks a lot noisier, or more specilly, compared to when I open the EXR in PS that was saved. (ie the EXR looks cleaner in PS than what I see in the VFB render)

I haven't yet tried opening the EXR in the VFB. As soon as the current render is done I will try that actually...

[glorybound]

Not sure if this is specific to the BETA or not (since it's the 1st time I'm giving progressive a go). I've noticed at the end of a render, the VFB looks a lot noisier, or more specilly, compared to when I open the EXR in PS that was saved. (ie the EXR looks cleaner in PS than what I see in the VFB render) I haven't yet tried opening the EXR in the VFB. As soon as the current render is done I will try that actually...

yes, I pointed that out, too.