Does anyone know of a free Open-Exr importer for Photoshop (I’m using CS3) that retains all the channels? The same way that the Pro Exr plugin works?
I’ve done a quick search on the forums but the pro-exr is the only importer that seems to be mentioned…
Cheers
There is a plugin for PhotoShop on the official EXR site (http://www.openexr.com/downloads.html), but I do not know how useful this is.
Best regards,
Vlado
Sadly the provided official plugin is pretty simple. More pain than gain. The integrated PS one is quite the same. 
I don’t know if any free importer exist, but there is a commercial plug called ProEXR that can import channels correctly. I’ve only used the demo once, and the plug imported every channel except Z and Alpha, and since I needed only these two, I went back to Fusion.. 
Also, ILM provides a decent SDK for their file format, so if you’re into that kind of wired sicko kink stuff (programming), you just might want to give it a try.
best regards,
A.
Kyle me old mucker
What’s wrong with ProExr? Does the job?
Funnily, Im working on trying to get an exr with all the layers in to CS3 this morning!! I’ve emailed the maker of the plug-in to see if he can explain things better. I have a 32 bit file all good to go, but we need 16 or 8, and the gamma of some of the layers gets messed up and can not comp correctly anything other than 32 bit space.
Ill let you know!
Greetings my pert nippled friend!
Nothing wrong with Pro Exr… just wondered if there was a free one knocking about… As a company we’re not using LWF (yet). So didn’t want to have to try and explain why I needed it… and justify the expense (yes mark, I know it’s not expensive). Currently rendering non LWF and sorting the Exr native gamma in PS (0.4545).
When i get time (working 65hr weeks the past fortnight), I’ll put a case together and hopefully get us all switched over at some point. Might wait a while to see how v-ray progresses before i do that. Doing some nice stuff, very high turnaround so might need to buy some wacom nibs soon at the rate I’m retouching…
Maybe there will be a day when we can render straight to a 32bit PSD with all channels, then use it as a 8bit Smart layer in Photoshop for retouching… now that would be nice…
i thought your not supposed to use LWF when using exr’s and hdri’s
Yeah, you use LWF, you just don’t burn in the gamma.
hmmm…ive never heard this. Remember lwf just isn’t about the final image output. Its also about more efficient sampling which brings quicker rendertimes.
I guess that’s why don’t affect colours has been added in colour mapping. so that you can have vray sampling for a gamma corrected image without actually affecting its gamma, and output to a linear format.
Better rendering times and correct calculation as well in order to get a better image if my understanding is correct, Lele and others have many posts in in depth descriptions as to the exact details.
I render to 32 bit floating images in order to use Photoshop’s exposure controls. Mr Hinks and myself did a lot of this when we worked together as we both spend a lot of time and effort in post (stills + animation), it’s a fantastic technique that allows you to have that extra control (+ it reduces the amount of time lighting/rendering etc). Especially useful when doing camera matched work.
Yup, I concure
I think a hdr workflow has nothing to do with “LWF” or anything fancy like that. LWF is basically just a “get exactly out what you’ve put in in 2.2 like gamma” thingie. Saved as a hdr image, gamma and exposure loose their importance, since these transformations will not distroy any data in the image, (will not clamp it in any way) and thus can be applied later in PP.
Sampling efficiency is another thing.
best regards,
A.
Open Exr saves the image in linear colour space and displays it with the 2.2 gamma curve, so it does have a lot to do with LWF.
Further info: http://www.openexr.com/TechnicalIntroduction.pdf
I.E - When Rendering to an Open Exr image, there is no need to burn in the gamma through colour mapping or any other route.
By “hdr image has nothing to do with gamma and exposure values”, I meant that later you can change those without any data loss. For example, if you saved out an exr image or sequence with “double 2.2 correction” , you can just apply a gamma function in many application without clamping any image data.
OK, exr stores the image info in a linear space, but imo that goes for all image formats out there. The displaying of that information however is out of the formats hand, displaying anything goes to the image viewer, or the editting application. And I think it is pretty easy to spot, if the gamma is way off in the displayed image.
best regards,
A.
Please could Vlado, Lele, Cpnicols, instinct, daforce or anyone clear this up. For myself, having spent many hours with Kyle going through a LFW and exr workflow it seems stupid for people to start chimming in with incorrect information. Whether a problem with communicating the same thing, there are hundreds of posts on this subject.
The original question is getting missed. Back to the point!
Answer to the original question:
There isn’t yet I believe. The easiest way is to either render the layers to separate files (or to a vrimg file and split it up with the vrimg2exr utility), or just buy Pro EXR. Really. It’s worth it.
As for the LWF thing, EXR files do indeed work in linear space. Meaning if you render out a LWF image without burning in the 2.2 gamma correction, save it to EXR and open it in Photoshop, then Photoshop will automatically interpret the file as being in sRGB space. Other then that there’s not that much difference with the format unless you buy the better import plugin.
M_hinks, technical stuff is one thing, what you see is another one. The whole LWF, or any other workflow is just an aid, a tool that you use, and the important word here is use. Understand that it won’t make your work any better by itself. Workflows are only tools to help you control your work better. In the end, the final output is all that is matters. An image, an animation, or anything your eye and brain can see. In the end, it is quite unimportant how you’ve got there.
I’ve been working in LWF before it became a popular topic everywhere without even knowing I was working in lwf, and I’m pretty sure many others have been too. But right now, everyone talks about it like it was a final and redeeming discovery for all of the CGkind. But you’ve guessed it, it is not. It’s just a tool. And if I don’t like the end result, I will put a curves on it, I will adjust levels, I will paint a little shadow over there, I will add a bloom, color correction, separate greens, and will do everything, to get an image I like. Sometimes it is the same that came out of the renderer, sometimes not even close. And I think this is how it should be. After all, You are the creator.
Forgive me if I was insulting, distracting, or anything like that. The OP question was answered by the way, so I hope this was not so off topic.
Use whatever tool that fits in your hand, and use it well. I think that is all.
best regards,
A.
Well i’d consider LWF rather a technique then a tool 
Anyways there are reasons for us (wich doesnt mean these have to apply for everyone) that make lwf an indespensable technique in our pipeline. We’re linear all the way from rendering through post. sRGB is applied as a LUT only throughout the process and for final output if required (wich it usually is heh). Sadly the support for EXR is still not as good as it should be. It is THE Format out there, yet it is ignored by a lot of developers. The few that support it support it in stupid ways. Partly for no reason and partly cause their architecture seems to forbid proper support of EXRs.
So far the only publicly available tool that really supports EXR is nuke. And it’s great at that and not only that. We DO a lot of post on the lwf rendered images, shure..doesnt make LWF any less important or useful for us.
Fusion CAN read EXR Layers, but guess what ? only 1x RGBA per FileIn if i am not mistaken, PS is horrible at reading EXRs (as with many other formats btw ). Shake is pretty weird with them too and it’s not going to change now anymore either.
Regarding Linearity of EXRs. Well yes EXRs are supposed to be stored in a linear fashion. Yet the Format itself couldnt care less WHAT colour values you store. And as it allows for metadata and custom data layers it’s a breeze to use any Colorspace you want to. Besides it is closely related with CTL wich can take care of LUTs in a pretty flexible fashion.
Just my two cents
Regards,
Thorsten
Thanks Aldaryn, and instinct. Very concise and clear.
I agree 100%, the technique is irrelivent in the final image/ani, just the final look and realism. I would personnelly consider a LWF as generating renders quicker and more accurately to real life. We are building are workflow around it as instinct has.
Also, about ProExr, I am in discussion with the developer of the plug in regarding the correct use of it to keep the elements comp but work in 16 or 8 bit not 32, as PS hates 32 bit!! Ill keep you posted.
I wonder, having not used Nuke, can it be used on the same why as ps for 2d images, ie putting in trees, peeps etc?
Well it is not the typical still image app. Putting in Trees and such wouldnt be a problem (actually it would be pretty nice as you could export your max camera and place trees on planes in 2.5D right within nuke like this :
But it is not really the tool of choice if you have to paint a lot. On the other Hand it imports the multilayered EXRs out of VRay as one single input node and provides all embedded channels in a very convenient way.
In the end i am not sure how suitable nuke would be for somebody coming from a pure PS background.
Kind Regards,
Thorsten
