new features of 3.07 Tweet

[pegot]

I really love the new emitter options. It would be amazingly useful to extend them further if possible by being able to selectively target individual objects.

So instead of unchecking "Visible on specular" for an emission light and having it affect all objects in a scene, how about being able to selectively target objects by excluding them only?

[slepy8]

Today I found another new/special feature of 3.07.

Different render looks.

Below you can find exactly the same frame from exactly the same scene, rendered with C4D plugin 3.06 and 3.07.
After first investigation it appears it's not a plugiin issue.

[slepy8]

So no one will reply to this?

[coilbook]

Today I found another new/special feature of 3.07.

Different render looks.

Below you can find exactly the same frame from exactly the same scene, rendered with C4D plugin 3.06 and 3.07.
After first investigation it appears it's not a plugiin issue.

maybe shell (wall thickness issue ) if liquid mesh touches it or actually penetrates glass

[slepy8]

Man!
We are talking about the general look of the scene.
Can't you see that it's not only the problem of the liquid in the glass?

EVERYTHING looks entirely DIFFFERENT.

And please tell me is it possible to rerender this scene for your client in a year or two? In Octane ver 4 for example?

Do we keep notes about the Octane version that was used in each project? Do we keep all versions of the renderer for the future?
Because my client might come one day and ask me to rerender one scene, and then I'll be in deep shit.

One more thing.

DO WE GET ANY INFORMATION ABOUT CHANGES OF THIS SIZE?

No one important informed us about the differences in rendering.

I'm still waiting for response!
@Abstrax?
@Mojave?

[mojave]

@slepy8

As part of this version release notes you may find a section called Improved rendering of non-uniformly scaled emitters. This was fixing an issue with the emission of non-uniformly scaled emitters.

If you have one or more in your scene that may be causing the scene to render differently.

Also, have you tried exporting an ORBX file from C4D using the core 3.06 and try to render in both 3.06 and 3.07 standalone? Do you get the same difference?

[coilbook]

i thought the focal point was the blender. That's why noone answered. It is sad when someone tries to help and you yell at them

[abstrax]

Man!
We are talking about the general look of the scene.
Can't you see that it's not only the problem of the liquid in the glass?

EVERYTHING looks entirely DIFFFERENT.

And please tell me is it possible to rerender this scene for your client in a year or two? In Octane ver 4 for example?

Do we keep notes about the Octane version that was used in each project? Do we keep all versions of the renderer for the future?
Because my client might come one day and ask me to rerender one scene, and then I'll be in deep shit.

One more thing.

DO WE GET ANY INFORMATION ABOUT CHANGES OF THIS SIZE?

No one important informed us about the differences in rendering.

I'm still waiting for response!
@Abstrax?
@Mojave?

The response is basically in the release notes. There were major issues with the emitters and at some point we needed to fix them:

We also improved rendering of transparent emitters in general. Until now transparent emitters were not taken into account if they got hit by an indirect (eye) ray, which resulted in weird artifacts like in the rendering below, ...

Until now, non-uniformly scaled emitters were rendered incorrectly. The problem was that in that case the direct light sampling was done non-uniformly, too, resulting in artifacts in some corner cases...

So in your opinion, what are we supposed to do? Leave stuff broken, because there might be some scene somewhere on this planet that may now render differently? Or fix things and move on? We have decided for the latter and will do the same in the future with other things that are broken.

We are trying to convert scenes of older versions to make them render the same, but sometimes that's just not possible, like with the emitter changes above. I.e. if you think you may have to resurrect a project in the future and you want to have it render exactly the same as in the version you were initially using, it is a very good idea to keep track of the version you used for a project. This would allow you to use the older version if necessary. Again, it shouldn't happen very often, but it is possible.

In your scene above: Try disabling "visible on specular for all transparent emitters". This might help in your case.

[mz]

Thanks for this great Update!

I had some issues with Fireflies in the specular recently. A few days later i saw Redshift is planning a "Rough to glossy Firefly improvement".
Would be awsome to have a function like this - are there any plans for this in the future?

Thanks again.

[abstrax]

Thanks for this great Update!

I had some issues with Fireflies in the specular recently. A few days later i saw Redshift is planning a "Rough to glossy Firefly improvement".
Would be awsome to have a function like this - are there any plans for this in the future?

Thanks again.

That sounds like the caustic blur option in Octane. Try to increase the value if you've got issues with "fire flys". Please be aware that this only has an effect in paths with some rough / diffuse bounces. If there are none, the "fire flys" are very likely specular reflections of some bright but small light source (like the sun).