Come on guys, are you really going to try to convince me that the fire that my own eyes have seen, that the fire that I have taken photos of many times, is pink and not shades between yellow and reddish? Are you all really going to this point to defend AgX’s non-user friendliness? Ok, I give up
And remember the most important thing here, leaving aside the example of fire. For emission with AgX the user will be choosing a certain base color from shaders, color ramp, etc. nodes, and visually obtaining a different color than the selected one. If you advanced user understands it, well, you choose AgX by default and save a new default configuration file that you will surely know how to do as an advanced user that you are.
The Hue Correct Node in the compositor, I have found to be a versatile little thing that can bring back abney as well as any skewing for aesthetic reasons.
It is easy enough to put the notorious six back in with AgX with existing nodes, but quite difficult otherwise to remove when using the other transforms. I do wonder if the realtime compositor work will lead to us seeing live color grading in the render window while the render is going (as that will pretty much solve all complaints about color since AgX can be graded into anything and it will work around the UI building limitations of OCIO).
Some examples with renders using AGX and Filmic, I think at final what you think what’s best for you is subjective, even if technically AGX is superior, at least for me I find that AGX gives more sensation of depth and realism.
What is not subjective is the “Base Color” you choose on your emitter shader nodes, and the result you see in the final render. That “base color” selected by the user will be more similar to the final result with Filmic than in AgX. All the things you mention here are from the point of view of an advanced user. The new user and the common user’s thought is simple, I want to choose a base color in nodes because I want it to look in the viewport or final render with the color that I, the common user, has chosen.
Notice the highlighting now of what I had written. I can see some of the orange base color selected in that screenshot. And now what would it be like with AgX?
It seems the base color and distance of lamp in both examples has changed, check that. In any case, I see the selected base color as much more predictable with the expected result (from the point of view of a common user at least) in the Filmic example.
No I just rotated the viewport a bit as I was playinng around, since it 's not a set-in-stone camera angle it’s impossible to get the exact angle as before.
Let’s hope the audience gradually get away from the Notorious Six era, like how good ARRI’s results are. I can’t believe Fuji’s new Reala ACE film sim still bares that same N6 digital-accident look:
What you advanced users have to understand is that the common user is an artist, not a physicist who understands light and colorimetry. The artist chooses colors in the configurations because he wants to see those colors reflected in his final result. The common user does not do mathematical calculations in his head when choosing a color, mentally knowing how it will turn out later. The thinking of an artist or common user is that basic, if I choose a color I want it to look like that in my result. If I want an orange result then I choose an orange color. If I want a pink result I choose a pink color. As simple as that
i know your struggle i’ve been experience that with both filmic and agx, unfortunaly if you want correct color you’ll have to use the standard view transform.
your fire scene have a major exposure problem you have to fix before talking about colors, usually fire is brighter than anything else that’s why you need to town down the exposure, you can experience that yourself if you try to take a picture of fire with your phone, when focusing on it the phone will automatically reduce exposure, blender doesn’t do that.
I thought one key reason why Filmic and Standard remain in Blender is so to provide an easy coexistence between those who want NPR and maximum color control (ie. simply the traditional canvas but in 3D) and those who really want to push film-quality realism (where terms like albedo and exposure become more important than raw color).
If the NPR and arthouse crowd find a problem with AgX existing at all, then the nuclear option would be a custom colormanagement folder they can replace the existing one with.
I usually make fire, I have taken photos of fire. Certainly depending on the fuel/material I have been able to see predominantly blue, yellow, reddish or orange tones, but never predominantly pink. You guys are making me think that maybe my eyes are the ones that are bad.
Anyway, I’m sorry that the discussion has been diverted to just the example of fire. What I was trying to point out is the common user’s/artists point of view when choosing a color from the settings and the expected result on viewport/render.
the reason you see the fire like that in AGX it’s because a shader problem, not a color management problem, you can see it in this video, AGX is not clipping the light of the volume emission, but standard and filmic does, if I reduce the exposure you can se how the color of the flame is not yellow, its orange in the intensity and red at the lowest, but because I have a strong emission the orange tint is washed out, so if you want a yellow color you need to make a custom shader node to set it right. the reason you see it with a pink tint it’s because the red color is also a little bit washed out.
Please do not lose the point of view that I am trying to discuss regarding the color that the artist/common user chooses in settings and what she/he expects to see as a result in viewport/render.
Let’s see Mr Elephant official sample scene:
You think that when the artist “chose” orange colors in the texture image and emitting lamp on the right, he “expected” this orange result?:
Standard:
As a non technical user, here’s the way I see it: AgX just preserves more information for you to play with to get a nice image.
The example you linked is not a great example. If you were working on that scene, you’d be making artistic adjustments as you go, based on what you see. In the example, the View Transformed in just switched.
I made a couple of color adjustments to both images (VERY quick and dirty, probably breaking all kind of rules) , to get the color to match better and show what I mean:
See how in filmic the highlights just become a big mustard-looking yellow splotch with no definition ? And the green color of the curtains gets lost ? No matter what adjustments I try I can’t correct that, because the information is just not there.
AgX keeps more color variations and detail, it actually make you feel the intensity of the explosion much more.
Once you see it you see it everywhere. AgX will just make everything look better for free.
I agree that the most noticeable definition part in AgX is a good thing (mainly on the walls, not sure in the shadows of volumetric fire. I think that in your AgX setup some highlights result burned/overexposed with less definition in the volumetric fire). But see what I said in the previous message, regarding the color that the user chooses and what the user expects.
