E-Cycles - Faster CUDA rendering and better AI denoising

Ok, I thought the team was asked before doing the request. But who brought the theory it was a plan from me? You are welcome to clear things in your team and please check the facts before spreading rumours (who ever spread that rumour).

Has E-Cycles the same limitation as Cycles?

Like emitting a bitmap as a light source over a mirror onto a plane is not possible?

So far I’ve only seen Luxrender and Octane being capable to do that…
that’s the reason we have a Octane subscription (but expires end of year ;o)

Do you mean like an emmisive UVmapped textured screen (plane object) with lets say branding info on it, then mirrored to represent two outboard screens?

Well better to show how it was rendered with LuxCore:

IMG_0068

The lightsource can’t be seen…it was just a spot light with the bitmap set as emission…

Well not that important at the moment…only from time to time I need to render something like this to visualize products with user interfaces using DLP beamers, transparent OLED/MicroLED and so on…

1 Like

@bliblubli RE: "…fracture modifier devs… " and “…so you can speak with them if you want.”

Ummm, hmpf! I happen to be one of the FM team core devs and have been from the beginning working with Scorpion81 and Kaik. So there is no speak to them in your context since I am one of them, just so you know. We have regular meetings on various topics and “them” speak on a regular basis as far as myself, Scorpion81, Kaik and Jens…, aka the core devs in this context.

And “themselves” as a team have not made a request to be included and nor have “them” “agreed” to being included in your paywalled project. I can attest to that since I speak to the four people I mentioned above regularly and Scorpion81 almost daily. I’m not getting picky. I am just stating facts and looking for accurate information. I see Scorpion81 also replied similarly.

I will definitely bring up this topic now that I’ve been made aware of it in this current context you have mentioned and I’ll make sure things get further clarified. So I appreciate you openly responding to my question with some clarification. I don’t like PMing in this context since to me that feels more like collusion rather than cooperation and collaboration in the spirit of open source.

I’ll get back to you with a few more follow-up questions ASAP and some more clarification. Thanks again for your time and responding.

Viva F/LOSS and Fracture ON!

2 Likes

That’s interesting. E-Cycles “is” in general Cycles just gone to the next level, but you have me curious. I do a lot of mirroring and transparencies for event rendering and haven’t come across this so I’m gonna try it out and report back.

Did you mean something like this?

2 Likes

I renderd this animation using ecycles Neon Alley

here’s some comparison: Daily build (11’31"), Ecycles Custom preset (09’39"), Ecycles Fast preset(07’42")

The daily build uses the same settings as the Ecycles custom preset. The two things that I find more powerful in ecycles are the intel denoiser and the different way the AO approximation works, which is you don’t get black transmission materials when you go too low. The distance scrambling is also good to have, but I often don’t see huge time differencies and it does tend to give artifacts. It’s good for stills, but if you go too low those artifacts are quite visible in animations.

Here are the frames
Daily 2.79

Ecycles fast preset
NeonAlley_005_FastPreset

Ecycles Custom preset
NeonAlley_005_CustomPreset

2 Likes

Yes, dropping the scrambling out for animations makes it clean on my end as well…good work :+1:

1 Like

Did you use bidir to render this image? If I understand right, you project an image on a mirror which reflects on half transparent glass and you want it to be physically simulated? If you could send me a file, I could have a look if you want.

Good that we both want clarification, good also to know you are in the team. The points from my point of view are:

  1. The beginning: It was a request from one of your team member.

  2. How near from the core this member is, you can clear it in private?

  3. The method: It was meant as a cooperation with the FM team. I gave my contact to work with @Scorpion81 on it. So @Scorpion81 could have just give me his opinion directly and everything would have been cleared.

  4. a) What I do currently: just to make it clear, I ship a full version with E-Cycles because it’s the only way I found to have a good integration. I would really prefer to only ship it as a pure plug-in. It’s a lot more work for me to make 6 weekly builds for 3 platforms than shipping one packed add-on once a month for all 3 platforms.

    b) As I already said in PM, I have enough work and got regular requests for custom builds based on Mantaflow, sculpt branch, etc. I always redirected to the course in such case for people to learn how to do it and even combine as they want what fits to their workflow. I’m ready for cooperation if a branch maintainer(s) want.

  5. Cycles: the BF worked to allow people to even make Cycles closed source (Cycles started with GPL and was re-licensed on purpose by Brecht and all contributors with the agreement of the BF to add Apache, which required gathering the consent of many people, which is a lot of paper and legal work, so something you really need to be motivated to do).

    a) It means any coder who has contributed or is contributing code to the official Cycles version knows or is made aware his work can be used for closed source project when submitting the patches on the official tracker. So the mentality of official Cycles contributors is very different from the Blender contributors.

    b) This possibility is used by at least Cycles4D, the Poser and 3DSMax version and Rhino, etc. Do you prefer me to go to one of those package or do you think it’s more beneficial to have me teaching many people how to do it and have one of the fastest renderer available in the Blender ecosystem?

4 Likes

To test adaptive sampling, I build some scenes with volumetrics. Which one do you prefer as reference benchmark? Or do you have suggestions or blends which you think would better suit real use case.
1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

Render time is about 17 sec per frame on a 2080Ti at 1080p.

3 Likes

Actually I like the 4th one, just let it play out for another 90 frames…good combination of intense fire with lots of emission giving way to thick dense oily smoke, that’s usually where Cycles (and Octane/Blender) would choke and you’d have to greatly increase the samples to clean things up:+1: 17 sec a frame, now you need to release that like now :rofl: I could use it :wink:

2 Likes

Hi,
Got swapped emit / env passes in denoise layers.

This group node is just adding passes together, so it gives the same result, but I’ll fix it to make it look more clean. Thanks for the report. Très joli dessin au fait :wink:

Sorry for the late answer!

Optical vignetting doesn’t just make the corner of the image darker (which can easily be done in compositing), it also changes the shape of your bokeh as it gets closer to the edges of the image. This is what gives a cat’s eye / swirly look to bokeh:
image
Yes, you “can” get optical vignetting by modeling the lens in front of the camera, but it’s hard to control and time consuming.

The second thing is the colored bokeh texture. It allows to create more realistic chromatic aberration than in compositing, as it exaggerates the aberration in the parts that are out of focus. In compositing, unless you do your DOF using you Z-depth in there (which I wouldn’t recommend in this day and age), chromatic aberration usually just consists of blurring / offsetting the different color channels, from the center of the image. It doesn’t take depth of field into account.
http://bertrand-benoit.com/blog/wonky-bokeh/
You can get the shapes by modeling it in front of the lens, and I assume that you could get the coloration of the bokeh by having three offset colored shapes in front of the camera. But again, that’s not user friendly. Here was a patch to support bokeh texture that never got into Master: https://developer.blender.org/D1691

However, this isn’t enough as you would get the same bokeh coloration independent of the position to the focal plane. This is where longitudinal chromatic aberration becomes important.
This isn’t something that isn’t really supported by many render engines, but this adds a lot of realism to images. Fringing doesn’t have the same tint depending if it’s in front or behind the focal plane.

I am asking you as you seem to currently be the most pro-active coder for Cycles :slight_smile:

3 Likes

Good morning Mathieu (o;

I tried to change a blender file from Octane to E-Cycles…and spent some time due to the fact the the 3d viewport preview was much darker as the rendering…then I switched back to master branch and there the preview was fine…

Master branch 3d viewport preview (64 samples)

E-Cycles preview (64 samples)

Is the preset somehow affecting how alpha in principled shader is displayed?

Hi,
I guess you was using the 0516 build? There was a bug with alpha on principled in viewport that I fixed in the latest builds. I could maybe back-port it to 0516 if necessary.

Hi,
I’ll add it to my to do, but it may take some time. I remember there was a real camera add-on. How much of what you want is done by this add-on already if any?

None of this is done with that add-on, it only adds camera exposure controls and autofocus (also supported with more controls in my add-on Photographer)

These features really are rendering features that can’t be added only with add-ons.
Thank you for considering it at least :slight_smile:

1 Like