Hi,
Recently our studio finished residential visualisation project. Posting some of the images.
For final rendering we used Corona 1.4, which saved a lot of time (approx. 30%). Thanks corona team 
Higher quality images on behance: https://goo.gl/G7XzXg
Amazing work!
nice lighting and composition. is that a motion blur on the red car? on the first image, it looks duplicated.
Nice! How are you lighting those exteriors and interior cutaway shots? Do you have any hidden ceilings e.t.c?
Thank you guys for the comments.
@cgdigi, yep, thats motion blur and long shutter speed.
@agentdark45, interiors have upper wall and ceiling geometry which is not renderable. To lighten up the rooms some lights were used. For exterior only hdri.
Super crisp. I lika a lot.
Thanks. The crispness is because of original 7k image. Sometimes it looks even too crispy (with bicubic reduction). For my eye it’s ok for interiors, but for exteriors I tend to use this effect not that drasticaly
Nice work!
can you tell what hdri did you used ?
thanks
Thats Peters 1433
really nice. but i cant seem to achieve shadows like yours using that HDRI 1433 or basically any of peters hdri’s. can you explain how to go about getting good shadows with just the hdri or did u add corona sunlight to it???
HDRi questions, HDRi question never change :- D
@Juraj, you may know better than me, how hard is to hear same question hundred times
@Yagi, I will provide following tips for you which might be helpful. There is no right answer, since every scene or situation requires new approach.
– hardwork and a lot of testing. a lot. really.
– reference study. Thats the key to succes in my case. First of all, you must know how shadows/light look in different situations. Only after you will be able to replicate it.
– I noticed that different hdri’s behave diffrent in each scene. So you have to choose right one, or even modify them. Peter has really good ones, considering prices also.
– 32bit workflow
– VFB+ comes incredibly handful in tonemapping.
– sometimes you have to go extreme with corona tonemapping settings. And it works!
I think I will write a post in my blog this week about lighting setup in this project, so you may follow it.
By the way, I did not use any additional lights in this project. But sometimes I use.
thanks ,will be looking forward to your post
Short description
After much experimentation as Juraj recommends, I found adjusting the gamma of the HDRi will give sharper shadows and brighter light. I use C4D so I’m not sure about MAX but in C4D you add a filter to the HDRi and lower the gamma to between .4545 and .75.
You set the overall multiplier at 0.1 which I think you should also highlight since the default is set at 1.0
I only use cg-source hdri’s and you can leave it at the default but PG hdri’s you need to tweak I assume? Always a bit unclear why PG hdri’s have to be set that low for “correct behaviour”.
Fixed.
Well, Peter could tell more about this. But anyway, while it works, no reason to complain I think. I only tweak hdri’s if I need full backround with surroundings, sometimes it does a great job for reflections. But this time default sky was used
Are you using corona tonemapping at the same time with vfb+? what do you mean by 32bit - do you save the output as 32bit exr and then open it in vfb+?
First question – as you see, yes. VFB+ has wider range of settings which helps a lot.
You don’t need to save output as exr and load it in VFB+. Well, at least I don’t do that. When rendering is done it automatically loads into VFB+, like in native 3ds max vfb. But after I do adjustments with VFB+ I export it as 32bit into photoshop and finalize everything else in the same mode. It just lets you have more info in photoshoping. And only when I am happy with the image, I export it as simple jpg or other web format.
No because this doesn’t matter at all. Multiplier is the same as exposure. If you lower HDRi multiplier, you have to rise image exposure. Or vice versa. The resulting image is the same, because just like frame-buffer, the HDRi also also linear.
Regarding the second issue:
Did you ever tried putting CoronaSky into material editor ? It’s completely over-exposed, because that’s physically correct brightness for it. Same goes for PG’s default exposure, although I never tested how close it it.
CGI has adopted different convention, and that is the 1:1 for human eye adaptation, but this forces you to use incorrect physical values for other lights or exposure if you leave it like that. You know how you have to use values like 0.05 if you add CoronaSun :- ) ? That’s the inconsistency for physical based approach.
Also the guy suggesting to use between 0.454 (reverse gamma ? just no :- ) ..) and 0.7 for HDRi is really bad idea. You can lower gamma for HDRi which lack dynamic range, like some of PG’s, but only within measure. 0.7 is already quite extreme, will result in strong color shift, and botched specular amount.
For CG-Source, I found that some of them, are almost 1:1 to CoronaSky/Sun in terms of dynamic range, and never had to go lower than 0.9. It’s better to use software like HDRStudio or just manually in Photoshop to boost Sun to correct levels instead of using gamma trick.
