Denoiser

[Fredrik Averpil]

Late to the party, but this looks really interesting.

Generally in production, we send scene directly a scene from Maya for example. We don't not export a Maya scene and after submit this Maya scene.

This is how we currently does things too. We send a bunch of commands to Pixar's Tractor which look like this: /path/to/maya/bin/Render -r vray <+ options> /path/to/scene.mb

But as I understand it, you would denoise on your local machine after the render is completed, correct?

I'll try to get some time to give this a try.

[Fredrik Averpil]

Hm... where was the download in order to try this out?

[vlado]

But as I understand it, you would denoise on your local machine after the render is completed, correct?

It's a command-line tool, you can run it on some machine on the farm automatically.

Best regards,
Vlado

[Fredrik Averpil]

It's a command-line tool, you can run it on some machine on the farm automatically.

Ah – excellent, perfect.

[^Lele^]

In production, you never have to modify a scene "on fly" and after come back to original settings. Why ?
1) Because you don't know exactly what the script in doing
2) You can break completely a scene if the script crash.
3) We customize a lot Maya/VRay. The script can clash with existing tools.

Imagine for example we disable renderElements. The script will generate renderElements. But because renderElements are disabled, Altus will fail because no renderElements will be rendered (because we disabled renderElements in render global (disable all)).
But imagine the script of Altus forces to enable renderElements (enable All) because it want to generate renderElements "on fly". But me, the user, intentionally (my choice) i disabled renderElements because i don't need to render renderElements for this scene/render layer. Why a script will enable renderElements and render all renderElements that i don't want to render ? It will break my setup and render things that i don't want (!).
Bad workflow.
And this is just 1 example...

The only good workflow if you want to do all things "on fly" is to use "Python scene access". It will never break your original scene and it will be "really" on fly.

But if you want a solid thing, you don't have to modify the scene on the fly and come back after to original settings.

After i tell this because of my experience (i do pipeline every day for many years). If you think my example (and this is just 1) is wrong, i would be happy to know how it is wrong.

There are a million ways to intentionally get stuff wrong, and often a lot fewer to get it right.

I'm not going to go through every possible permutation of how a setup could be wrong, and how to cater for those cases, WHERE POSSIBLE (for where it's not, we have users in front of the computer.).

I'm questioning the attitude of "everything's wrong, done backwards and i can tell you how to do it proper."
You have an executable, you know best and you seem to hate the implementation of innobright: stop whining, get coding.

That'll show us all.

[bigbossfr]

You have an executable, you know best and you seem to hate the implementation of innobright: stop whining, get coding.

That'll show us all.

I have rewritten all plugins (5 hours). This is a completely hacked Maya render global.
This is for me a 'real and clean integration' in Maya.
1 plugin, 1 script.

- all layers are connected to the masterLayer. When you change the DMC Subdivs of the masterLayer, it will automatically divide by 2 on other layers in real time
- all layers has overrides : you know exactly what you are doing and you have the control. Previously, the script changed some attribute on "fly", like the minShadeRate, secondaryEngine....and it was dangerous because an user worked with some attributes values, and when he used the old plugin, the old plugin changed some attributes values (????). So finally the image was not the same (don't tell me it was good...).

Next step : integrate the batch render directly.....in the batch render menu of Maya. Like : "Start batch render with Altus" (and obviously, do not change the name of images, like the previous plugin).

@innobright : they are a lot of errors code "Maya style" in the old plugin. Like :

M.shadingNode('samplerInfo', asShader=True, n='AltusWPP')

samplerInfo is an utility, not a shader.
So this is :

M.shadingNode('samplerInfo', asUtility=True, n='AltusWPP')

I can send a lit but, like i told, for we have to restart from scratch and do a real integration in Maya VRay.

Anyone can tell me how is working with animation please ?

[^Lele^]

Right.
I don't go about changing render settings at all.
All i change is a random seed and an output path, in max, and add and remove render elements.
Wiring parameters to "divide quality by two", as you seem to imply, is quite the dangerous path to thread, unless it's for a very specific way to go about working with VRay.
I don't use local subdivisions anymore, just progressive and MSR (which soon will disappear as well), so one would have to wire every possible render dialog parameter to make sure every possible render setup was catered for.
Further, after all this has been done, noise thresholds come into play, and throw quite the curve ball (less and less, with the most recent nightlies, but still.).

the process is simple enough, however you like to go about it:
*) add the needed AoVs
*) render with seed 0 and save image_b0
*) change the seed, render image_b1
*) build the command to run altus, and run it.

Your video shows the AOVs and the render layers to path out the separate images: one more push, and you'll be able to share a working tool with the community! ^^

[sharktacos]

I'll second the wish to simply have a checkbox to turn the denoiser on like Embree.

It seems to me that the general philosophy of the majority of Vray users is not that they want to do scripting and complex installs to use a certain functionality (in this case denoise). Having access to lots of options and control within the GUI that one can use if desired, yes. Needing to basically code stuff to get something to work, no thanks. Just sayin.

I also do hope that Chaos can partner with someone (perhaps Innobright as their denoiser does looks great) so that the denoiser could come *with* Vray standard. Of course I realize that such negotiations obviously wont happen on this thread. But I'm crossing my fingers that soon we will hear an announcement from Chaos about the new integrated denoising solution for Vray 3.2. Here's hoping!

[jasonhuang1115]

I'll second the wish to simply have a checkbox to turn the denoiser on like Embree.

I also do hope that Chaos can partner with someone (perhaps Innobright as their denoiser does looks great) so that the denoiser could come *with* Vray standard. Of course I realize that such negotiations obviously wont happen on this thread. But I'm crossing my fingers that soon we will hear an announcement from Chaos about the new integrated denoising solution for Vray 3.2. Here's hoping!

That would be awesome!!

[vfxronin]

well ironically this is a felid that unfortunately i am waaayy to familiar Innobright looks really promesesing but I kinda Cant help to wonder with any CG Denoiser! would it not be better to resolve the nosie as sample level be-for the image is rasterised? this way you can garanty image integrity. even if out of the box the result looks good there still prone to issue that later on will be piked up by comp!