Z-Depth pass problem (Anti-Aliasing/jagged edges) Tweet

[oguzbir]

Hey abstrax,
While you start dealing with the info/render passes or Render Elements as we call them in 3dsmax.

Could you please implement Material or Object ID passes with colours only with R G B colours..
you can read more about this need here:
viewtopic.php?f=82&t=56981

[Terryvfx]

I think the only useful piece of information I can add to this is that yes, the new mode to disable pixel filtering in the info passes will definitely will be useful to get correct results in things like post DOF but about the coverage/cryptomatte workflow I'm not to confident in pointing a specific solution, one thing for sure is that a coverage map is easier to use and I think every application for compositing is able to work with this at least After Effects is.

Thanks for asking abstrax!

[abstrax]

Hey abstrax,
While you start dealing with the info/render passes or Render Elements as we call them in 3dsmax.

Could you please implement Material or Object ID passes with colours only with R G B colours..
you can read more about this need here:
viewtopic.php?f=82&t=56981

You can do this already using the object layer node, where you can specify a colour, which is rendered in the object layer colour pass:

[FxDesign]

We will look into this issue in the next couple of weeks. Just to make sure that I got this right: We will add a new mode that disables pixel filtering on all info passes, except:

- layer mask
- wire frame
- AO
- all material passes (opacity, roughness, ...)

I have been thinking about the coverage passes and I don't think the original concept (storing the pixel coverage of the object ID with the largest coverage) can be implemented reasonably in Octane, we could do something that works similarly (storing the pixel coverage of the object ID that is at the center of the pixel), but I don't think it will be good enough to extract useful anti-aliased mattes from it. There is also the "cryptomatte" system (viewtopic.php?f=33&t=55253) which might be more useful since it allows the separation of multiple objects/mattes per pixel. So the questions I have are:

Which post-processing tools could use coverage passes and which tools can use "cryptomattes" or OpenDCX?
You would render those coverage/cryptomatte passes for only for one of the ID passes (material ID / object ID / object layer colour / render layer ID) or for multiple of these?
Is there any other approach that should be considered instead?

Great Abstrax
Can you tell us when it will be released ?

Thank you

[abstrax]

Great Abstrax
Can you tell us when it will be released ?

Thank you

When it's implemented (don't know when exactly we will get to work on it).

[calus]

We will look into this issue in the next couple of weeks. Just to make sure that I got this right: We will add a new mode that disables pixel filtering on all info passes, except:
- layer mask
- wire frame
- AO
- all material passes (opacity, roughness, ...)

It seems corrects to me.

Also do you intend to finally have a different switch for distributed raytracing and for filtering ?
because I don't think it's needed, unfiltered passes are useful only when motion-blur and dof are post-effects anyway.

Which post-processing tools could use coverage passes and which tools can use "cryptomattes" or OpenDCX?

- Nuke, Fusion and AfterFX can use coverage passes.

- A cryptomatte python tool is available for Nuke and one for Fusion is on its way:
http://www.steakunderwater.com/wesuckle ... php?t=1027
Cryptomatte only needs a scripting solution on the post-processing part so will be easily/widely supported.

- OpenDCX is the future obviously, but still very young,
as far as I know you have to compile yourself the preliminary Nuke toolkit.

note : I seem to remember cryptomatte needs coverage pass internally.

You would render those coverage/cryptomatte passes for only for one of the ID passes (material ID / object ID / object layer colour / render layer ID) or for multiple of these?

for multiple of these.