OTOY Forums

elsksa wrote: Unfortunately, it's a fallacious thinking. The "digital imaging world" is chaotic enough that such thinking doesn't have its place. Evidently, nobody will arrest you for doing it wrong but it shouldn't be normalized, especially for working around in-renderer limitations (there are none in-post).

[opinion]
With all due respect for your knowledge, experience, and willingness to share them, I have to disagree in principal. Tools are tools, and as a general rule, neither the intended purposes in the minds of their designers, nor the social/professional norms, ever encompass all the ways those tools will be put to use in the real world. There is no "wrong" way to use a tool by an informed user, just ways that may be more or less effective (even dangerous) to particular people in particular situations. There are certainly countless uninformed ways to use tools, but if the artisan chooses to use Tool X in a particular way, understanding the repercussions and risks, then that is perfectly normal and perfectly fine.
[opinion/]

I've learned a lot over the years when students used a tool "wrong," but quite effectively to accomplish the goal, reminding me that I'm becoming more and more of an old fart stuck in my ways.

I don't remember if this was before but connecting 16-32 bit HDR image to color correction node cause that this image loses its bits depth. Jittered color correction and Image adjustments nodes works fine with HDR.

SSmolak wrote:

Kalua wrote: Hi, SSmolak
Would you mind sharing the setup on how to make this "Field shape node" to work? Have been trying to make it work with no success.
Regards,

Hi, scene attached. You need to drag SDF object to Shape Input in Field Texture also link it in Transform Node too to match position.

If you use restart render in Octane LV - it will crash.

Yes. It crashes hen you reload he scene.
Other than tha if looks great.
THanks again for sharing!

frankmci wrote:

elsksa wrote: Unfortunately, it's a fallacious thinking. The "digital imaging world" is chaotic enough that such thinking doesn't have its place. Evidently, nobody will arrest you for doing it wrong but it shouldn't be normalized, especially for working around in-renderer limitations (there are none in-post).

[opinion]
With all due respect for your knowledge, experience, and willingness to share them, I have to disagree in principal. Tools are tools, and as a general rule, neither the intended purposes in the minds of their designers, nor the social/professional norms, ever encompass all the ways those tools will be put to use in the real world. There is no "wrong" way to use a tool by an informed user, just ways that may be more or less effective (even dangerous) to particular people in particular situations. There are certainly countless uninformed ways to use tools, but if the artisan chooses to use Tool X in a particular way, understanding the repercussions and risks, then that is perfectly normal and perfectly fine.
[opinion/]

I've learned a lot over the years when students used a tool "wrong," but quite effectively to accomplish the goal, reminding me that I'm becoming more and more of an old fart stuck in my ways.

Agreed. Been there myself and lived it through the many branches of audio-visual for over a decade of digital, and still do, it's undeniably part of the process. Plenty of such cases in music production as well. However, it simply doesn't apply in this specific context. There are defined and purely **technical** ("mathematical") specifications/standards that are incongruous for artistic/aesthetic purposes. Analogous to the world-wide misconception (thanks misinforming socials) of the colorist role, being two fold: (highly) technical & "artistic".

e.g. there can not be a "force-tonemapping" enabled + OCIO or OCIO ACES/AgX + PNG + destructive "post-process" (worse if in an inappropriate software). Many are uninformed and have untrained eyes omiting them to see the digital flaws, probably because many haven't "experienced" a proper workflow and image-rendition closely matching their aesthetic intention(s). Needless to mention that anyone who has trained their brain on broken imagery will hardly be in a capacity to discern the flaws: G.I.G.O..

Don't get me wrong, there is legitimacy in the "requested feature(s)" but a nuance to acknowledge in the implementation approach(es). The vast majority of digital imagery devices and tech is associated to preventable flaws, any avoidable contribution is one step forward a sane world. I often relate to the exemplary (yet not flawless) medical domain and the clear restrictions to prevent danger, lower risks and properly perform in rationally set medical conditions (as in surgery/OR).

Kalua wrote:

SSmolak wrote:

Kalua wrote: Hi, SSmolak
Would you mind sharing the setup on how to make this "Field shape node" to work? Have been trying to make it work with no success.
Regards,

Hi, scene attached. You need to drag SDF object to Shape Input in Field Texture also link it in Transform Node too to match position.

If you use restart render in Octane LV - it will crash.

Yes. It crashes hen you reload he scene.
Other than tha if looks great.
THanks again for sharing!

That's the why I didn't want to release it. But I done it because of several times that's asked. Some types of implementations like this are challenging.

aoktar wrote: That's the why I didn't want to release it. But I done it because of several times that's asked. Some types of implementations like this are challenging.

We have a saying here, "Damned if you do, damned if you don't."
Regardless, we all appreciate your outstanding efforts, Ahmet.

anklove wrote:Hello there! Any chance to solve this issue? If i have object with transparency inside of a VDB volume i can clearly see the mesh boundaries.

Is that a standalone thing? should i ask in their forum? thanks

It seems, that when I activate motion blur in the active camera, the perspective correction gets deactivated although it is still checked in the camera tag as on.

When you disable and enable motionblur again the perspective correction works as intended with motion blur shown in the Live Viewer.But as soon as you change something in the scene and it refreshes the perspective correction gets dropped again and I have to deactivate/activate the motion blur again to get also the perspective correction right. It's an okay-ish workaround for the live viewer preview.

But as soon as I send the final render to the picture viewer the motion blur is active but the perspective correction isn't anymore rendering all passes and beauty without perspective ocrrection, and I don't know how to workaround that issue when I want to got the final render with all the passes including Motion Blur and perspective correction. Can somebody check it if it is just me, or if that is an new occuring issue?

Thank you!

Update to the Motion Blur/Perspective Correction issue.

I discovered, that if I check "Disable Camera M.blur" in the Camera tag on, it behaves as it should. Perspective correction and Motion Blur working together and activating Motion Blur doesn't deactivate the perspective correction. But without "Disable Camera M.blur" ticked the perspective correction doesn't work, although it is activated.

Is that supposed to work like this?

thanulee wrote:

anklove wrote:Hello there! Any chance to solve this issue? If i have object with transparency inside of a VDB volume i can clearly see the mesh boundaries.

Is that a standalone thing? should i ask in their forum? thanks

Hi,
yes, it is Standalone/SDK related, but, have you tried to reduce the Volume step length value? ciao,
Beppe