how to output exr without junk layers

[Mnietek2707]

When a denoiser is used, there are many unnecessary layers in the output raw exr file - Color.RGBA, albedo.RGB, bumpNormals.XYZ.
I need only EffectsResults.RGB. Is there any way to avoid saving others? I just dont have enough disk space for this...
Or maybe is there any way to save RGB_color to non-clamped .hdr file?

[hermit.crab]

Yes, that's a popular concern, however, those elements are necessary if you wish to do further denoising (through the vdenoise.exe tool) - better safe than sorry. There used to be a workaround for this - by using the vdenoise.exe, which used to output only the Denoised RGB, however, there's still an issue active about it (internal bug-tracker id: VMAX-10760). Otherwise, from what you're asking - saving the RGB through the VFB should be an option.

[^Lele^]

They aren't junk layers, they're saved so to enable post-render denoising (including multi-frame, temporal one).
There currently is no way to not save them with a thick Exr.
You can save split channels instead, denoise, and delete what you don't need later, if you don't have access to ways of extracting individual REs from the Exr.
EDIT: or as Aleks mentioned, you can surely just save the actual channel from the VFB.

[Joelaff]

Can you Denoise split layers with the standalone denoiser? I didn’t see how to do that. Will it work if you use separate folders per element?

I think saving split layers would be ideal. Then the denoised output would be just RGBA, rather than a second sequence of large, monolithic EXRs

The standalone Denoiser really needs to let you choose which elements to save in the out file. Perhaps this is simply something like “Export only denoised elements.” Then you wouldn’t have any duplicate data from the original exr sequence.

[^Lele^]

Can you Denoise split layers with the standalone denoiser? I didn’t see how to do that. Will it work if you use separate folders per element?

I think saving split layers would be ideal. Then the denoised output would be just RGBA, rather than a second sequence of large, monolithic EXRs

The standalone Denoiser really needs to let you choose which elements to save in the out file. Perhaps this is simply something like “Export only denoised elements.” Then you wouldn’t have any duplicate data from the original exr sequence.

I'll log the request for improvement.

No, i meant he'd save the splits to keep the rest of the REs, denoise the thick EXR (which will produce the denoised image), and delete the layers not needed from the split save, along with the thick Exr.
It's all a LOT easier with something like nuke or fusion.

[Mnietek2707]

They aren't junk layers, they're saved so to enable post-render denoising [...]

I do not need that. So for me their only function is to occupy disk space. Why am I being made happy by force?
Maybe it should be up to the user to decide whether to save these layers or not?

[^Lele^]

There are constraints to how a file save happens when rendering.
It's impossible to raw-file save and not save *everything* in the image.
You have options if the image is displayed in the VFB (then you can save the layer you want, after it's been denoised.), or through the split-file saver, with a post-delete action.
Otherwise, like others do, get Fusion or Nuke, and then you can remove what you don't need from the thick exr saved through whatever means (load -> extract the REs -> recompose the EXR -> save. highly scriptable.)

[Joelaff]

Great for those of us with scripting or programming acumen, but for the average user I can se how saving ONLY the RGBA after a denoise would be helpful. (Even if the standalone denoiser is far better and lets you experiment after the fact).

[^Lele^]

Great for those of us with scripting or programming acumen, but for the average user I can se how saving ONLY the RGBA after a denoise would be helpful. (Even if the standalone denoiser is far better and lets you experiment after the fact).

The split file save allows you to do what you please with REs, and will save only the denoised output, No need for nuke.
*Raw* file save is a different thing altogether.

[Joelaff]

You would want us to have an option to waste generated data on the whim of a checkbox, to not do so manually?
The split file save allows you to do what you please with REs, and will save only the denoised output, No need for nuke.
*Raw* file save is a different thing altogether.

Yeah, pretty much.

I understand, and have been making use of, the extra data, but many people may just want to save what they were perfectly happy with in the VFB (the RGBA denoised to their satisfaction).

So, yes, throw the rest of it in the bin and save the RGBA. After, all you are proposing people do that after the fact. Why make the user do it manually (or through scripting that probably 90% of the userbase can't do)?

[Joelaff]

For those of us that like scripting and getting everything JUST SO through scripting, etc. please see my thread here:

https://forums.chaos.com/forum/v-ray...production-use

[^Lele^]

So, yes, throw the rest of it in the bin and save the RGBA. After, all you are proposing people do that after the fact. Why make the user do it manually (or through scripting that probably 90% of the userbase can't do)?

One word: agency.
Checkboxes, particularly if they are in render settings, are shown to be massive issues as people drag those settings along for years on end.
Alas, i just tried it, the split file save does what is being requested in the OP, the thread is exhausted.

[Joelaff]

Lol. Maybe give the user agency by trusting the user to make the decision before rendering, rather than after.

Pedantic? Perhaps. But software is for the users.

[^Lele^]

Lol. Maybe give the user agency by trusting the user to make the decision before rendering, rather than after.

Pedantic? Perhaps. But software is for the users.

That agency you speak of has shown time and again to be highly fallacious, by the sheer count of support requests involving such setups.
We never got *one* support request blaming us for user-initiated manual deletion of files from disk.

[Joelaff]

Ha! Well, I don’t have access to your support request data, but I can understand the OP’s desire not to waste disk space if they are happy with the denoised results they got.

I get that a company has to take into account the financial impact of their decisions. Increased support requests=increased costs.

But something tells me you get more requests about how to save ONLY the denoised result than not, given hermit crab saying it is a common request.

It’s kinda like how when the client says it needs to look like X. You make it look like X, even though it should really look like Y.

Of course, I’m with you and would rather have the flexibility.