Can Vray use filmic instead of SRGB please? I gived a link that explains it all !

[Bigguns]

Have a look ! It's wayyyy better. I think it will make the renders out of Vray look's tremendously more real ! Hope you'll do it Vlado, should not be hard to implement. Trying to edit my message and the forum says this... : Please enter a message with at least 10 characters I have way more then 10 characters, what is the problem ?

http://www.maximeroz.com/blog/#/filmic/

[Rens]

Have a look here https://forums.chaosgroup.com/forum/...c-ocio-and-lut

[joconnell]

Yep Rens.

Bigguns - the long version of it is this:

I've been thinking about why some people were saying they got more filmic / realistic results out of the likes of corona and fstorm than vray and as discussed in the page Rens has linked to, it's all just down to a view lut at the end of the process. Vray, like physics and real world light, is a linear renderer. The maths in vray work just like they do in the real world and it makes things accurate and easy to tweak in post since all of your passes that come out will work with your normal compositing modes of add, subtract and so on. The problem that we get with linear though, is that our eyes don't see in linear and camera manufacturers typically don't out put linear either. With a camera, whether a film or slr camera, it's job isn't to be a linear data sensor and it isn't supposed to output really accurate colour and brightness values, it's job is to output a pretty looking picture. Pretty much all digital cameras have sensors that DO collect data in linear, but if we look at these images directly, they're a bit flatter and more boring than we'd like. They could be very accurate to what was in front of the camera, but they don't look like what our eyes saw. Our vision has a slight colour curve to it and so the camera manufacturers had to add in a colour correction curve so that their linear data looks the same as what we saw - it's not linear any more but it looks like what we'd expect to see and that's probably important. Likewise if you take an image from an slr or a movie camera and linearize that, it gets a bit more flat and boring looking!

So what some of the other rendering software is doing is just applying that colour curve to the render frame buffer right at the start - I think in fstorm it's the default so things might look more similar to the human eye. The only danger though is if it's burning this curve into it's passes and elements so that you can't get linear data out of it. If it does, then it's going to make it really difficult to break apart and recombine your passes well to tweak things in post. What would be more useful though as everyone seems to have concluded in that thread is just to have that filmic LUT loaded in your vray buffer so as you're working and rendering, you're seeing your image as it'll look in the end with filmic applied, but it's NOT burning it into the data and messing up your passes. The process would be to work with the lut on so you can judge things properly, then when you go into nuke / photoshop afterwards, use your linear data that came from vray but again load the filmic lut into nuke / photoshop so again you can tweak your settings with all of the maths being correct and working well but viewed through the filmic curve. Then when you're happy all you'll do is apply the lut as a final colour correction to burn it in, much like a DOP shooting boring looking flat images and then adding a bit of a grad on afterwards.

It's nothing much bigger than just having the filmic LUT loaded in your vray buffer

[Bigguns]

Yep Rens.

Bigguns - the long version of it is this:

I've been thinking about why some people were saying they got more filmic / realistic results out of the likes of corona and fstorm than vray and as discussed in the page Rens has linked to, it's all just down to a view lut at the end of the process. Vray, like physics and real world light, is a linear renderer. The maths in vray work just like they do in the real world and it makes things accurate and easy to tweak in post since all of your passes that come out will work with your normal compositing modes of add, subtract and so on. The problem that we get with linear though, is that our eyes don't see in linear and camera manufacturers typically don't out put linear either. With a camera, whether a film or slr camera, it's job isn't to be a linear data sensor and it isn't supposed to output really accurate colour and brightness values, it's job is to output a pretty looking picture. Pretty much all digital cameras have sensors that DO collect data in linear, but if we look at these images directly, they're a bit flatter and more boring than we'd like. They could be very accurate to what was in front of the camera, but they don't look like what our eyes saw. Our vision has a slight colour curve to it and so the camera manufacturers had to add in a colour correction curve so that their linear data looks the same as what we saw - it's not linear any more but it looks like what we'd expect to see and that's probably important. Likewise if you take an image from an slr or a movie camera and linearize that, it gets a bit more flat and boring looking!

So what some of the other rendering software is doing is just applying that colour curve to the render frame buffer right at the start - I think in fstorm it's the default so things might look more similar to the human eye. The only danger though is if it's burning this curve into it's passes and elements so that you can't get linear data out of it. If it does, then it's going to make it really difficult to break apart and recombine your passes well to tweak things in post. What would be more useful though as everyone seems to have concluded in that thread is just to have that filmic LUT loaded in your vray buffer so as you're working and rendering, you're seeing your image as it'll look in the end with filmic applied, but it's NOT burning it into the data and messing up your passes. The process would be to work with the lut on so you can judge things properly, then when you go into nuke / photoshop afterwards, use your linear data that came from vray but again load the filmic lut into nuke / photoshop so again you can tweak your settings with all of the maths being correct and working well but viewed through the filmic curve. Then when you're happy all you'll do is apply the lut as a final colour correction to burn it in, much like a DOP shooting boring looking flat images and then adding a bit of a grad on afterwards.

It's nothing much bigger than just having the filmic LUT loaded in your vray buffer

I totally agree, except that the Vray frame buffer , when you save the image, don't save it with the LUT !! I asked Vlado to make an option for that, that when checked at on, it will save the image as is in the VFB, need to also work for an animation. I'm not a guy who likes to do pass and play with it in comb etc.. and most artist I know don't either so it would be very very neat for us to have it, and yes, it's why the render of Fstorm look more realistic then Vray out of the box.. you don't get those blowout region, really annoying.

Can you make that happen Vlado, please ? By default it to be filmic and should be able to save image and video as is ?

[sharktacos]

You can read that LUT into Photoshop now. So if you want to have it baked into the image that could be an option.
You can also of course do the same in Nuke. It's just applying a single LUT. That's not hard.

[joconnell]

I totally agree, except that the Vray frame buffer , when you save the image, don't save it with the LUT !! I asked Vlado to make an option for that, that when checked at on, it will save the image as is in the VFB, need to also work for an animation. I'm not a guy who likes to do pass and play with it in comb etc.. and most artist I know don't either so it would be very very neat for us to have it, and yes, it's why the render of Fstorm look more realistic then Vray out of the box.. you don't get those blowout region, really annoying.

Can you make that happen Vlado, please ? By default it to be filmic and should be able to save image and video as is ?

The nice thing is it's a simple problem and it'll get fixed! I think rens did a conversion of that filmic lut and put it up for download on the page he linked to!