I can see the advantage of rendering most utility passes separately, since as you say once they are done they are done and usually very quick to output.
But in my mind the approach of rendering RGB matte passes separately seems to involve a lot of potential problems (this being the very topic of this thread), without offering too many advantages. In particular, I personally prefer to use material IDs rather than object IDs, the thinking being that if you want to adjust material A here, you more than likely want to adjust it there as well. This allows for a pretty straightforward material ID and multimatte setup in the beauty pass, which will have none of the antialiasing problems mentioned. Also, using a separate layer or even scene to get mattes out means replacing all materials (otherwise this is of course redundant), then worrying about quality and matching issues. Transparency and refraction are also not taken into account, which would be the case if output with the beauty?
But in my mind the approach of rendering RGB matte passes separately seems to involve a lot of potential problems (this being the very topic of this thread), without offering too many advantages. In particular, I personally prefer to use material IDs rather than object IDs, the thinking being that if you want to adjust material A here, you more than likely want to adjust it there as well. This allows for a pretty straightforward material ID and multimatte setup in the beauty pass, which will have none of the antialiasing problems mentioned. Also, using a separate layer or even scene to get mattes out means replacing all materials (otherwise this is of course redundant), then worrying about quality and matching issues. Transparency and refraction are also not taken into account, which would be the case if output with the beauty?
Comment