hi,
since i couldn't find any in octane, i'd like to state this one as a wish, hoping to be heard:
is it possible to have a pinhole camera in addition to the thin lense?
i would love that, otherwise i don't see how i could make the render output from my host (c4d - standard and/or physical renderer incl. tfd and/or xparticles renderings rendered with those and/or scetch&toon) match the octane output.
unfortunately c4d only provides pinhole. i know that maxwell an vray do have an additional pinhole option, which makes the process of comp of those outputs with c4d-outputs very comfortable.
i would love to have that option in octane, too.
thx.
pinhole camera possible?
Forum rules
Please add your OS and Hardware Configuration in your signature, it makes it easier for us to help you analyze problems. Example: Win 7 64 | Geforce GTX680 | i7 3770 | 16GB
Please add your OS and Hardware Configuration in your signature, it makes it easier for us to help you analyze problems. Example: Win 7 64 | Geforce GTX680 | i7 3770 | 16GB
win7prof. | i7 4930, 32gb | 2*980ti 6g for renderings | 1*660 for displays
- Hesekiel2517

- Posts: 458
- Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 10:57 pm
Hey Mesut,
just set the Aperture to 0 or the f-stop to 1000 (the values are linked). Everything will be sharp.
Greetings
just set the Aperture to 0 or the f-stop to 1000 (the values are linked). Everything will be sharp.
Greetings
thx for your answer.
well... in the meantime it seems, that it was a classical user-behaviour that led me to the false assumption, octane and c4d-renderings would not match.
since i was not able to reproduce the situation with a simple scene, i went on and had a look at the project-files in which this "problem showed up".
it seems, that i moved parts of the object a small amount and then did my c4d/tfd/xparticles-renderings. those i tried to match with the older octane renderings which of course did not include this movement of object-parts, so eventually the diverse renderings could not match.
well... sorry for raising up your attention without having cleared my own situation properly beforehand.
best,
mesut.
well... in the meantime it seems, that it was a classical user-behaviour that led me to the false assumption, octane and c4d-renderings would not match.
since i was not able to reproduce the situation with a simple scene, i went on and had a look at the project-files in which this "problem showed up".
it seems, that i moved parts of the object a small amount and then did my c4d/tfd/xparticles-renderings. those i tried to match with the older octane renderings which of course did not include this movement of object-parts, so eventually the diverse renderings could not match.
well... sorry for raising up your attention without having cleared my own situation properly beforehand.
best,
mesut.
win7prof. | i7 4930, 32gb | 2*980ti 6g for renderings | 1*660 for displays
It is not about DOF but about lense distortion - C4D doesn't have any because of its pinhole camera.Hesekiel2517 wrote:just set the Aperture to 0 or the f-stop to 1000 (the values are linked). Everything will be sharp.
Mesut: Did you test OC vs C4D camera? I just did with a focal length of 22 at short distance (which gives you the strongest distortion) and found no difference.
-> Which makes me wonder if Octane even uses a realistic lens system as Vray does?!
C4D 2025 | Win10
yes, it was about (assumed) distortion - similar to the difference that one can observe when comparing vray/maxwell thinlense with c4d-pinhole.zoppo wrote:It is not about DOF but about lense distortion - C4D doesn't have any because of its pinhole camera.Hesekiel2517 wrote:just set the Aperture to 0 or the f-stop to 1000 (the values are linked). Everything will be sharp.
Mesut: Did you test OC vs C4D camera? I just did with a focal length of 22 at short distance (which gives you the strongest distortion) and found no difference.
-> Which makes me wonder if Octane even uses a realistic lens system as Vray does?!
in vray/maxwell this discrepancy is to be ruled out by selecting the option "pinhole". then the results of c4d and those external render engines do match.
i assumed that i was experiencing a similar effect during the last two parallel commercial projects with octane (my first ones using this enginge... yeeeeyyy
now, after things have calmed down, i was able to have a look at the situation again but was not able to recreate a simple situation in which this discrepancy occured.
so i looked at the projects and realized that user-behaviour was the problem (i had moved parts of objects ^^), and not the assumed mismatch of cameras.
in simple test-scenes, willing to reproduce the assumed discrepancy, i tried diverse wide and tele situations but none of them led to discrepancy between octane thinlense renderings and c4d-pinhole ones.
which - at first glance - is good news.
having a second thought, one might wonder, if there should not be a discrepancy though... because... well... a pinhole camera is something different then a thinlense camera... isn't it?
win7prof. | i7 4930, 32gb | 2*980ti 6g for renderings | 1*660 for displays