What is it, and why should I care? I am trying a plugin that converts my scene to ACEScg, which promises a more accurate color. I must say, I think my colors are more accurate. However, I am seeing much more noise in my images. Any tips?
Hi the amount of noise in you image is not directly related to ACEScg.
Can you give us an example, a comparison of the two images?
Are you using AColorManager for switching? How is it holding up with a scene with lots of materials from different sources? And Forest Pack and all?
Maybe it isn’t ACESsg causing the noise.
if your images go from VRay to PS to client - just don’t bother with ACES.
some old tests: https://youtu.be/XJlNVbmKtA8
what is a use case for using it?
it’s a colour management system. consistency between aplications, cameras, displays etc.
one part of it are colorspaces much wider than srgb. it can futureproof the content for when more capable displays and projectors become available. you can also use it (one of aces colorspaces, acescg) to do all the calculations within VRay. it will handle high saturation scenarios better - but if you haven’t noticed difference in that regard between VRay and Corona it won’t blow your mind.
and try the little script Lele posted some time ago - color space swapper or something along those lines. much simpler solution. all you really need to do is to tell every VRayBitmap what colorspace it contains. its all in the docs.
I can tell the difference, and I used it on my past two projects; both have much richer colors than I normally get. I’ll look up the script you mentioned.
acescg would actually produce less saturated colours in VRay when compared to srgb. or rather oversaturated colours in srgb mode would look more natural when calculations are done in acescg.
and where did he post it?
thanks for relinking it over here! =)
I found that a script I already have does it. I’ll post that shortly.
google harder !
i seem to spend most of my time in that tool these days…max or vray needs a rule system like maya where you can specify texture naming and their corresponding colorspace info.
Edit: bah me, wrong link.
here:
maybe its because im chicken, but I dont like the idea of having to go through all my textures and rename them, breaking my asset library etc. 
The rules thing was useful because it allowed me to work with my textures as they are but still automate the process. The vraymax convertor tool is very useful, but i just feel like im constantly in it
I agree and I will never start renaming my textures, that’s insanity. There needs to be a better way. So many ways this could be implemented or specified, renaming textures is not one of them.
The best we can currently offer under Max is the above.
I personally find the rule system a cop-out, and a mess to set up properly, as there are a number of unavoidable clashes that can arise from it, and a degeneracy risk for arbitrary material (i.e. a rule per texture file.).
After all, rules won’t be able to cope with randomly named textures, in random places, either: they’ll need some form of naming convention, like any pipeline tool in CG does, to be effective.
All we do is have fixed, clear rules for naming.
It is much cleaner to have a copy of an asset built for the colorspace it’s meant for, and old libraries refreshed to cope with the newer paradigms, than wading tentatively into a quagmire of mixed assets and hope they’ll work.
The same kind of scripts you use will be of great help in relinking the renamed bitmaps into your shaders, just you won’t be doing it several times per project.
You already rename them to define the channel they use, and rename them to define the transfer function.
I fail to see why adding one more particle for the color space to use is a blocker.