Hello,
I have created a topic for all upcoming stuff from me, I hope that is okay.
I had the chance to test your render engine and I am amazed! Dont know why I haven't seen this renderer before.
The speed is suprisingly fast! There is a lot what I need to test. But for now, I can say that the quality is really high.
I am working with corona for years and I can't see any difference to other renderers on the quality.
Sure there are some functions, wich needs to implement. But I am sure, that will be done in near future.
I have thrown some objects in to a small room to test the materials and the overall lighting.
I really like the look, I can achieve with this engine. I will definetly do more tests!
This engine has a lot of potential!
By the way, I am working with Cinema 4D. The render, wich I have done took 10min on a GTX 1080.
There will be come a lot of questions from my side, should I post them here in my topic or create a new one for every question?
I will mostly post archviz renders.
vblackrender's corner
|
Administrator Posts:
Apr 22, 2020 15:01
Hi vblackrender., welcome here and thanks for warm words! Yes, you didn't know about CentiLeo because the shape of our features was too fluid and so no any adverticement... Implementation could simply change in any direction.
Currently there is an ongoing work to improve the knowledge about us, such as making an online documentation. This should help to gain more downloads. Btw CentiLeo should be fast in darker interiors which are not very well lit. And right now there is development for particles/massive instances. What version of Cinema are you using? The is a lot of attention on the new Cinema nodes starting from R21. Soon we will make them for S22 too. Your questions are welcome! The topic such as this is ok for images. Any questions are ok in Discussion forum (for some more general ideas that can be relevant to more people) or here (with questions specialy important to you).
CentiLeo Chat:
|
|
User Posts:
Apr 23, 2020 09:02
Hi Kirgman, at the moment I am using R18.
I have found the "User Manual Version 0.44 alpha" .pdf, wich is very helpful. It looks like it is from 2016. Is there a actual version of this documentation?
Archviz Potfolio:
|
|
Administrator Posts:
Apr 23, 2020 10:12
Hi vblackrender.,
I am writting the new docs now. At first there will be information about materials, projections and shaders. Just stay tuned, initial things will be out in the coming days. I recommend to use R21! It's nodes are so cool and we have made our own nodespace for it.
CentiLeo Chat:
|
|
User Posts:
Apr 23, 2020 20:40
Hi Kirgman, that sounds very nice!
At the moment I can't use R21, because I am still working with Windows 7. I am playing around with some Depth of Field.
Archviz Potfolio:
|
|
Administrator Posts:
Apr 24, 2020 06:50
I like the lighting! Is it area light in window hole? Btw you can make it invisible for camera: in centileo light tag make zero internsity for Camera setting.
CentiLeo Chat:
|
|
User Posts:
Apr 24, 2020 09:12
Hi, thank you. I am using white sky and a portal in the window hole. Should be the same result with the area light.
Great, thanks for this tip! At first, I did not understood, what that area is for, generally in other render engines, you can just simple "check" and "uncheck" the visibility. But in this case, you can to choose between "0" to "1", wich can be very interesting to use in some situations. Will it be possible, to check and uncheck the visibility of the lights in the editor? When you are working with multiple lights, all will change the look in the editor. For now I can activate the red dot for that, but than you can't see your light in the editor, when you select it and want to rotate, scale or move it.
Archviz Potfolio:
|
|
Administrator Posts:
Apr 24, 2020 09:27
Actually I don't like the current light tags because changing a value in just single simple tag will force to check the full scene object structure (not necessary objects itself) and in case of some complex procedural geometry with motion blur it may force unwanted delays. The other problem is that light tags dont inherit values from parent light tags (which can be helpfull for changes to many lights at once). The plan is to duplicate all light settings to Emissive material (Emissive property in the current Std material). Materials are inherited well and changing only them will not force for scene for extra checks. What do you think?
CentiLeo Chat:
|
|
User Posts:
Apr 25, 2020 11:45
That sounds very logical to me. Would love to try that out, if that will be implenment.
Archviz Potfolio:
|
|
User Posts:
Apr 29, 2020 18:40
Hi,
time for a new render. I took this premodeled scene and changed the lighting and the materials. For my taste the result is looking pretty good with centileo. I have exported the render as .exr file and loaded it into the Corona Image Editor. I applied contrast, filmic highlights, filmic shadows, curves and a lut on it. That changed the look a lot. (The power of a great tonemapping ). 
After that, I did just few things in Photoshop and finished.
Archviz Potfolio:
|
|
Administrator Posts:
Apr 29, 2020 19:54
Hi vblackrender., It's great! I like it a lot!
The fabric on a bed is very-very good! However, to my taste the carpet still needs some work. Btw, what's the raw output of CentiLeo image? Just to make a visual comparsion
CentiLeo Chat:
|
|
User Posts:
Apr 29, 2020 20:10
Hi Kirgman,
yes, that carpet could have more structure! I have uploaded a comparison with the raw output and the post final. As you can see the amazing look in fabric materials, comes often from the tonemapping. The raw and post results are like day and night. Thats why the tonemapping functions are always so important to me, when it comes to archviz. The most effects comes mostly from "filmic shadows" and a good "lut" with contrast. I can send you the raw.exr file and the the .config file with my settings if you like. Wich you can load into the Corona Image Editor and look by yourself how strong these functions can change the look of a render. To become an image, what you could integrate into CentiLeo.
Archviz Potfolio:
|
|
Administrator Posts:
Apr 30, 2020 17:02
Thanks for clear comparsion! Pls send me your settings, I will have a look. Not right now, but will make a note on this.
Btw, have you used the a light portal in window to accelerate HDR lighting? There is a setting in light tag (Is Portal). A corresponding light source should be area rectangular light. Also there is a little fake feature called "Light Shift" which sits inside Bump tab of Material settings. Higher values narrows the incoming lighting angles and hide bump mapping artifacts (if any) on low poly parts (if they are there). In the front left corner of a bed there is probably one such issue or just a hard shadow.
CentiLeo Chat:
|
|
User Posts:
Apr 30, 2020 18:24
PM sent.
Yes, I am using always Portals. But in this case, when I use a HDR the rendertime is logically going up. Just with a white sky, would render as least twice as fast.
I havent any bump activated on the material on the wall. I have denoised in post the walls a a little bit, but the noise on the dark corners where hard to get rid off.
Archviz Potfolio:
|
|
User Posts:
Apr 30, 2020 18:27
Here we go with the night version of the interior. I have used a blue sky here. The render was much faster compared to the HDR lighted version.
Archviz Potfolio:
|
|
Administrator Posts:
Apr 30, 2020 19:12
CentiLeo Chat:
|
|
User Posts:
Apr 30, 2020 19:53
Yes, that would make more sence to place it there. The dark areas takes too long to clean up. At the begining it cleans fastly but than it takes and takes. But that is in every renderengine the same with HDRIs. Mostly I work with a white sky or area lights infront of the windows. HDRIs can create amazing moods sometimes, but for me speed is more important. Here are 3 different versions. All are rendered for 1min. The day scene above was rendered for 2 hours and the night version rendered for 40-50min.
Archviz Potfolio:
|
|
Administrator Posts:
Apr 30, 2020 21:52
Ok, HDRI with portal is less noisy than without them. I am more calm.
Please, show another HDRI portal vs no portal but without any interior area lights. With equal amount of iterations: 1, 2 or 4, and show the image and time for both cases (with portal it should be around 15-20% more). That would be interesting to analize some internal technical solutions.
CentiLeo Chat:
|
|
User Posts:
May 1, 2020 17:20
The portal version took few seconds longer. Both were rendered at 10 iterations.
Archviz Potfolio:
|
|
Administrator Posts:
May 1, 2020 19:04
Bad... Too much noise! It should be less! Something like here on a similar setup (less noise with 4 iters).
Please, can you send me a scene file and HDR for experiments to (via some kind of dropbox or similar). Non-distribution is guaranteed! Maxon trusts us
Maybe I can find some quick improvement, maybe not.
CentiLeo Chat:
|
||||
|
|
||||
Users browsing this topic