Ok just found the V-Ray LUTs Explorer! cool thanks to Lele!
Ok, so what’s the status with this ?
Is there any good ideas to take from Fstorm or other render engines(i.e. Octane) and implement it in Vray ?
I do, personally, think as well that Vray needs an enhanced tonemapping.
I’ve been raised this point to developers, but I haven’t got an answer whether this will be something to be looked at or not.
Now, I know that vray offers a lot of flexibility when it comes to tonemapping: you can do with curves whatever custom tonemapping you want. But, the problem with curves is that, manually, you cannot achieve any accurate realistic behaviour. You just have to guess things around.
To get a natural / realistic tonemapping, you would have to set your colour mapping type as Reinhard, but then that would be embedded into the image - which I don’t want since I need the 32 bit linear render for post.
So, I need to have the Reinhard applied on top of my linear render but as an LUT that I can adjust and that I can save as a file to be imported afterwards in post.
In simple words, I would like to set my colour mapping type as Linear multiply, but then have the Reinhard as a Correction Control in the VFB where I would adjust the burn value, then save that as a .cube file(or whatever). This is the most important aspect for me.
And a more advanced color mapping would be the Filmic tonemapping(implemented the same way as described above) which I’ve been banging on about for quite some time 
photoshop, nuke or fusion?
there is a reinhard node in fusion thats good
Honestly what to take of it is that well fstorm is really nice to use and the tonnemapping saves alot of post processing work, i have been testing it and getting really nice images without the need for any photoshop at all. It has also made me look more into gpu rendering, so far i have not been able to get good performance from vray rt but with my crappy card its working better with fstorm, idk why it just is, but as for gpu rendering, i just like the fact that graphics cards are nicely priced these days and getting more affordable and powerful and i can simply buy a new card and stick it in and have double, tripple or in my case 5 times the power of one card without the need for a new pc and expensive costs. before i was stuck with just using the cpu rendering and not paying any much attention to gpu rendering but i am now looking to get a few 1080 and soon the ti versions when they drop for use with gpu rendering with vray and fstorm. Here are two images i recently worked on in my spare time as practice, only chromatic aberation was added in photoshop and an lut was use in fstorm and at 20 percent strength which is nice to be able to blend in the lut with the original image which we need in vray. All these engines are powerful even the young fstorm but it misses alot of features but its very usable at the moment and i think as time goes by all these engines will end up on the same level one day. So for the near future Vray is stil king but new kids on the block have fresh blood and have been getting alot of attention
Hear hear
But you can already do that!? What else do you want? There are already exposure and burn values in the VFB and you can save a .cube file out in the latest two SPs.
And a more advanced color mapping would be the Filmic tonemapping(implemented the same way as described above) which I’ve been banging on about for quite some time :)Which of the three or four different flavors of filmic tone mapping do you have in mind?
Best regards,
Vlado
And trust me, when that day comes, you will be complaining how complicated they’ve become and how the new kids on the block are so much better
Best regards,
Vlado
Quoted for agreement
i agree, am human, can’t be satisfied:) look for the fun it in vlado, creating something from nothing, implementing all the new features etc should be alot of fun man
For me it’s all about the lens effect.
When I compared linear for linear between FStorm and Vray I couldn’t see a big difference (there is, mainly on the reflective GI) but other than that, not so much.
BUT
When comparing not linear renders, FStorm stands out with the lens effect it applies, having a pretty and real time bloom/glare and flares is a great addition.
It could be pushed even further IMO like having presets of lenses that would be created based on real world lenses.
Some will say we can do that all in post, but if so, I’d like to know how we can do a easy 1 click solution that works and looks as good than FStorm in AE for animations. 
Stan
MagicBullet had some good filters, but I don’t think many people used them. There are PS actions that can do this, but again, we don’t use them. Sometimes we fall into the pattern of wanting things that we really don’t need. We are like kids that want the latest game. Life would be so good if we had just one more thing, but in actuality, we’ll never be happy chasing that.
i agree 100 percent, when will i learn to be content, idk
I have tried converting my last coupe project to FStorm, but I never got it to work. I am sure it something that I am missing, but who has the time?
Yes, Vray could benefit from a simplified interface.
When I work with Vray, I feel like a hacker: tons of windows open: from the lights and camera settings to the console and render settings, because it seems you’re in a constant need to adjusting all things.
When you work with Fstorm, once you’ve set up you settings in render settings, all you need is the render window.
I know, what I’m saying here has no substance, so not sure fi this is a real feeback since i’m not pointing at anything specifically, but that’s just how it feels.
And Vray’s render settings could be simpler.
I’m an avid of all those advanced settings, and I might enjoy dwelving into them, but most artists can’t stand that.
It took me several days just to test every single setting in RT(also check if they wrok/are supported or not in RT) in various simple or more complex scenes, to come out with the best settings combination. Now I saved that preset and things run extremely fast, like 3 times faster than Fstorm or Octane.
So, when set up properly, Vray is a killer (fostorm/octane users’ argument is that “scanline is even faster, but quality is what matters” - which is a legitimate view).
And, yes, I know you have the option to use Default / Advanced / Expert modes, but you still tend to use the expert mode because you think you can find out the ideal solution to best settings in the world.
So, I would do the following for VrayRT:
1. remove Authorisation and About rollouts (move them to a separate tab). You don’t want to see all those unecessary things when you work with setting up your scene.
2. Remove all settings that are related to VrayAdvanced and strictly keep those that only affect VrayRT.
3. Global Illumination: not sure if Ambient Occlusion or Multipliers for Primary/Secondary engine or Saturation/contrast/contrast base are still relevant to RT or if anyone is using them.
4. LightCache: Keep subdivs, but Sample size and Scale(world/screen modes), not really. Remove all other prefilter, leak prevention, interp samples, etc.
Although, this is an interesting case because LC screen is way slower than LC world. LC screen is just as low as Fstorm, Octane. The only way to get a fast render is using LC world, and with that, you get a faulty GI solution as well. Not sure hot to get things perfect here. One thing is for sure: you don’t get GI splotches and stuff in Octane/Fstorm, and the rendering speed is comparable with Vray’s. So, they’ve found some sort of universal formula here.
5. Environment: is this relevant to RT anymore ?
6. Camera: You have the camera settings in camera properties. Never used these here in render settings. Those are, probably, if you want to set up your perspective view.
7. Defautl displacement: remove this. Keep all displacement settings in displacement modifier or Material displacement.
8. System: defautl geometry(static, dynamic, auto). Just remove this - make it Auto anyway.
9. Texture options: remove this - make it 0 so the required memory size will be autodetected.
Yes, if you use this software, and that software and another 10 softwares, you will be able to get the same results. Great.
All those softwares cost money, you know ?
And, the most important thing is that groing from one software to another, you lose interactivity and you are prone to a lot of human error when you adjust all things manually in this software then in that software, etc. You also lose a lot of time.
In Fstorm, you’ve got all things in one place, and your image can be rendered straight as final.
i have been converting scenes myself, its really nice how it converts actually, and the interactive part is the best to see things update in realtime with no real issues, using it now on a project and ordering a 1080 card and then maybe a few more
Indeed, but they’re catching up fast.
10-20 features implemented in a matter of days or a week: from Depth of Field focus picker(in the VFB) to new bump (that works perfectly) and newe glare, flakes material and many others.
There’s a nice implementation here: Highlight Compression Macros for Eyeon Fusion + Foundry Nuke - Corona for 3ds Max :: User Contributions - Chaos Forum
You can see that in the first post, at the top:
- Corona highlight compression is just the classic Reinhard burn value. Vray already has that.
- Filmic tonemapping: not sure which 3 version of filmic tonemapping you say. It looks like there is a specific filmic curve that can be adjusted with the help of a few sliders: each slider adjusting different parts of the curve. I’ve been trying to emulate that manually, with custom curves in VFB, but that’s just pure guessing and not accurate at all because doing it manually is not relistically precise at all.
Yes, it works now. I love it !!
<shrug>Everything is very fast at the beginning when the code is small. They still have tricky features like light include/exclude lists, render elements, light select, hair/fur, Ornatrix/HairFarm support, particles, displacement, GLSL textures, sub-surface scattering, distributed rendering, UDIM textures, color by node attributes, actual layered materials, working deformation motion blur etc. Also, FStorm chose not to support any standard 3ds Max textures but to introduce their own set of textures for everything. If I had asked you to rework all your scenes with specific textures just so they work on the GPU, you guys would have grilled me…
Best regards,
Vlado