This is only very rough, using Blender’s internal Blackbody node for the color based on the temperatures in actual candle flames, but the intensities are most definitely wrong as I couldn’t quickly find data on that.
At least in terms of colors it should be roughly accurate though. (With the caveat that, from what I remember comparing RGB-based Blackbody output with spectral in the old spectral branch, the RGB colors aren’t that great)
At any rate, what you can clearly see here is, that at the very high end of exposure, the flame very very obviously does not match the surrounding cast color at all, whereas the AgX version manages this.
In the lower exposure settings, meanwhile, they are almost identical, but AgX already shifts a bit towards white, suggesting a brighter flame overall. It also does much better on the wick which transitions from red to orange smoothly rather than in a step.
Should also be noted, that these colors relate to skin tones too, so that’s rather important as well. Perhaps you are used to a (weird) yellow cast on flames, but that same situation on skin would be utterly unacceptable.
it’s because is washed out, in this scene there is a direct light projecting to the fire plane making it very over exposed, because it was made using standard it was no a problem the clipping, but agx work diferent, i modified the scene to get the fire shader using a emission shader to get a correct value of the intensity, I didn’t modified the fire color, i just corrected the intensity value.
Also the unexperienced user will not make something of this level without knowing how to set the color properly, probably the autor of this scene used standard because he wanted to use it and not because he didn’t know what he was doing.
I’m in the side of making more simplier the user experience but we are not playing videogames, if someone want to get in to 3D and rendering it’s a need to learn some things to improve, one of that thing is what is the colormanagement in blender and when to use each of it’s options, AGX is the best default in blender because it solve a lot of problems usually people have when are starting, rendering explosion and very bright emissive objects isn’t something common for neewer people. AGX gives the best color, but not always the more accurate colors are the most pleasant for people. Maybe I will be using filmic to render that types of effects because I like how the fire look with their yellow clipping color.
But how can it be okay that a 0.5W point light can have such a bad effect when the default point lamp in the default cube scene has power=1000W and the default of new added point lamp is 10W?
From the point of view of Blender and AgX code, would it be possible to find a better congruence between AgX and previous View Transforms regarding how power/strength of emitters affect the scene?
Such users are better off with standard in many cases and since filmic has been the default for years I’ve had to show graphic designer friends how to set it to standard and save their startup file. Now I need to show them how to install that addon that lets you force the colors of certain objects to match the brand guidelines after the render is completed.
that’s because the scene is very small, you can see the wall is just 13.3 centimeters in the height (the scene is in meters) so thats why the values are too low. idk why the scene was made too small
At the least, the devs. did not take anything from those who want bold colors in their lighting sources, even if it means the rest of the scene having a more CG look. The BF is not forcing people to use AgX, and I would be greatly disappointed if Troy_S did all of these writeups and R&D for naught because people reported to the bug tracker on how it was broken because it did not work well with workflows held over from before the Cycles era.
There might be a chance that the future switch to spectral rendering will help here, as I am otherwise not sure how Troy and Eary plan to improve the situation with emitters while preserving the quality and the smoothness of the existing transform.
Yes at the end of the day you can decide which one works best for each situation. I have made other tests where I can not really see much difference between filmic and AGX, apart from filmic is a little darker, the colours look very similar.
It is at this point we really can use live compositing that takes place at render time instead of the user having to wait until after the render is finished. That will save a lot of time as the grading can be tweaked as needed as the image evolves from more samples.
There is also another thing that the BF needs to do as part of their next steps, and that an upgrade of the grading algorithms in the compositor nodes. Many of the nodes were introduced in Blender 2.40 and were initially optimized to work with imagery made during an era where the very idea of color management was a strange concept in the world of Blender. I am not sure how well they were kept up to rate with the rest of Blender’s color workflow, but some do seem pretty dated in terms of the result they spit out (at least compared to how GIMP’s GEGL-powered filters handle things).
The conversation about the fire skewing pink reminds me of back in the day when I shot film. I found Kodak 35mm film tended to have pinker browns. I much preferred the way browns looked on fujifilm.
This is fucking insulting to those of us who actually studied art for five plus years.
I dare you to step out of your bubble of bullshit “artist” definition and realize that DaVinci peeled apart cadavers in a fucking morgue to hone his craft, Ansel Adams dove into chemistry, etc.
There is a long lineage of actual artists who care about their tradecraft, from offset print masters to graphite illustrators to oil painters to sculptors, who hone their craft and study the mediums.
Enough with this artist-as-idiot trope peddled by YouTube asshollery please.
Addendum… I’d be remiss if I failed to point out that one of the earliest colour models was invented by this guy:
Albert Henry Munsell was an American painter, teacher of art, and the inventor of the Munsell color system.
I do not think YAFU was trying to insult anyone.
There are all sorts or artists and all sorts of “users”.
Personally I am not the one to decide who is an artist and who is not worthy of the title, but I do not think the criteria should be:
“do you fully understand colour management in computer graphics”
nor
“have you studied art in a university”.
house mice are only about 6cm. Perhaps the artist initally was going for realistic lighting in a cycles render and later changed their mind.
Also, why are we debating a scene designed for eevee in the cycles development update conversation? And, are we sure everything within old eevee has been made fully compatible with agx or is that not a thing that needs to happen?
I suspect in this one there is a second light source in the fireplace? The golden look of that actually looks wrong but might largely not come from the actual flames.
I’d argue the fire doesn’t look right in any of those three though. That’s WAY too much yellow in the Filmic version, like even if you want it to be yellow like that.
EDIT: yeah it’s specifically Point.002 which is not the best color. If you tweak that to a different tone, it looks much more coherent.
This is actually likely a mistake that has been made precisely because Filmic (and Standard) hid the difference due the notorious six. The light source is too bright to meaningfully recognize the hue under those view transforms. It “looked right” but in actuality it isn’t!
And this isn’t a matter of “the artist didn’t know / should’ve known better”, but rather one of “the view transform failed to adequately show the difference”: A large portion of orangeish/yellowish hues would be seemingly adequate as they all get mapped to almost the exact same hue. The brighter the light source, the worse this issue gets.
Oh no, not the “new user/common user” argument again… (how many times should we have this discussion ?) and why does it have to be often related to color management ?
[New user ON]
Opening Blender for the first time, trying to move the default cube, he click on it and drag…
Hey ! this is not what I expected !! these defaults are bad !! after a little bit of struggling/messing around he discovers the move tool ^o^ !
LVL UP !
after watching some basic tutorials he enters edit mode and try to extrude some cube faces…
Hey ! this is not what I expected !! these defaults are bad !! after a little bit of struggling/messing around he discovers the other options of the extrude tool ^o^ !
LVL UP !
He then tries to mess with modifiers (bevel in this case)…
Hey ! this is not what I expected !! these defaults are bad !! after a little bit of struggling/messing around he discovers the need to apply transforms before working with modifiers ^o^ !
LVL UP !
[New user OFF]
My point is when the “new user” don’t get what he expects, the natural response is to look for an answer instead of blaming a default setting.
