Tweet
Well, why do you not use the V-Ray VFB, and decide to work with compressed dark tones, and no linear relationship between what you input and what comes out of it (lights, shaders, any visible color, and product thereof)?
The scene you provide has a medium IRMap, which renders a crop, here, in 20 seconds, the SR RE entirely blue.
It's blue because you aren't under LWF, and the values in that image are tiny, in absolute value.
So tiny, even their percentage variation is negligible, well below the threshold you set in the scene.
In fact, the IRMap skips over shadows quite happily, resulting flat and blobby, and misses out on chunks of rims and fine mechanical details.
So, you are right, there is no time-comparing this scenario with a BF+LC as that'll sample multiple times per pixel, instead of a few every a few other pixels, but in your case will still look very noisy, because of the non-LWF setup, as the sampler settings are thrown off-board: you will need four to five decimal places to have any hope of being precise with the way you drive the sampler through Noise Threshold.
Further to this, what the sampler sees, and what you see in the VFB (Max or V-Ray's) are not the same thing, as by not going LWF you apply a gamma to the final output by means of the display device, of which V-Ray can know nothing of (that's why you'd set up the 2.2 inverse gamma, btw.), which exacerbates noise as it stretches the pixel values back, after V-Ray's done sampling them (ie. you contrast it).
Resetting the render settings, still without gamma, and switching to bf/lc produces, as you said, slower renders, depending on the amount of visible noise one wants, but with a VASTLY superior GI detail, down to the finest crevices of the complex geo you have, which you could never know existed from the IRMap setup.
However, being outside of linear workflow, there is little that i can do to help you: it's not a fancy thing, it's kinda been a requirement for any CG displayed on 8bit monitors for over a decade, and V-Ray needs it to operate at its best, as it has had for as long as it could (well before the switch to 3.3, and before 3.3 even the more so.).
Try aligning yourself to LWF, leave the max and v-ray defaults alone, unless you have a very specific need to change a thing, and then we can talk about performance: it's difficult to fathom what is it you expect as quality and looks under this setup, for me, and i fail to see -besides needing a much lower NT with 3.3+ because of the percentage instead of absolute value- how 3.3 broke anything in respect to your workflow with IRMap and LC.
You're missing out a LOT more on not being under LWF, and not using the V-Ray VFB.
The scene you provide has a medium IRMap, which renders a crop, here, in 20 seconds, the SR RE entirely blue.
It's blue because you aren't under LWF, and the values in that image are tiny, in absolute value.
So tiny, even their percentage variation is negligible, well below the threshold you set in the scene.
In fact, the IRMap skips over shadows quite happily, resulting flat and blobby, and misses out on chunks of rims and fine mechanical details.
So, you are right, there is no time-comparing this scenario with a BF+LC as that'll sample multiple times per pixel, instead of a few every a few other pixels, but in your case will still look very noisy, because of the non-LWF setup, as the sampler settings are thrown off-board: you will need four to five decimal places to have any hope of being precise with the way you drive the sampler through Noise Threshold.
Further to this, what the sampler sees, and what you see in the VFB (Max or V-Ray's) are not the same thing, as by not going LWF you apply a gamma to the final output by means of the display device, of which V-Ray can know nothing of (that's why you'd set up the 2.2 inverse gamma, btw.), which exacerbates noise as it stretches the pixel values back, after V-Ray's done sampling them (ie. you contrast it).
Resetting the render settings, still without gamma, and switching to bf/lc produces, as you said, slower renders, depending on the amount of visible noise one wants, but with a VASTLY superior GI detail, down to the finest crevices of the complex geo you have, which you could never know existed from the IRMap setup.
However, being outside of linear workflow, there is little that i can do to help you: it's not a fancy thing, it's kinda been a requirement for any CG displayed on 8bit monitors for over a decade, and V-Ray needs it to operate at its best, as it has had for as long as it could (well before the switch to 3.3, and before 3.3 even the more so.).
Try aligning yourself to LWF, leave the max and v-ray defaults alone, unless you have a very specific need to change a thing, and then we can talk about performance: it's difficult to fathom what is it you expect as quality and looks under this setup, for me, and i fail to see -besides needing a much lower NT with 3.3+ because of the percentage instead of absolute value- how 3.3 broke anything in respect to your workflow with IRMap and LC.
You're missing out a LOT more on not being under LWF, and not using the V-Ray VFB.
Comment