Several people have mentioned this as well as myself. If I work on interiors with LWF, this method works great.
However, there’s issues using Linear Workflow with the current Vraysky on exteriors with the Physical Cameras. The skies tend to either be too dark at certain exposures or a very bright cyan - you can never really find a vraysky that looks balanced using LWF. It also doesn’t seem to be producing enough GI at default levels. I’ve tried putting the vraysky in a colorcorrect map at 2.2 gamma and this still doesn’t work.
I did do a quick test today - took a shot outside (its quite sunny) and matched the camera/vraysun/sky, all settings the same inc camera and time of sun in the sky.
Anyway, rendered the image as 1 gamma the sky was very dark, rendered it at 2.2 and it was fairly close, and the sky was a better match. But Iv heard Vlado say that the whole LWF is not correct anyway, but if thats the case whats the best way to work with the vraysky/sun beceause to my eyes it looks alot better with 2.2
BTW, the changes in colour could very well be down to WB. Unfortunatly me camera uses Kelvins as a mesurement for WB, and not sure how to make that work on a vray camera as its a basic colour.
I do that trick when i use LWF or not, put a vray sky in environment slot and tweak its intensity , turbidity and render till i like the color of it, sometimes i create another sun and change sun node manulay in vray sky to tweak desire color and position of the sun (most of the time i use 9:00 am), the original sky that is created in first place is moved in GI environment override slot in vray properties to make shure right exposure and illumanate of the scene is intact.
PS: its LWF btw, see the avatar the sky is made with the same method, no post..
Well I did some more tests to see where the cyan was coming from. It is a result of using 0.0 for vignetting. Also in my location, the turbidity has to be taken down to 2.0 (I wish it go lower, but that would not be real?) to get closer to actual sky conditions.
