They should be called angel rays, things that will never change: thoughts, feelings about caustics

This is a photo I took last week while sitting at a café. They always give you a glass of water. The glass was empty when the afternoon sun hit the glase. The resulting caustics were very bright and clear. The design of the glass made everything even more eyecatchy. Don’t worry, it’s not a render yet, but obviously will be at some point.

The caustics that afternoon made me remember many experiences with caustics and people, not just 3D artists. Take the world as a frame, instead. Their fascinating beauty leaves no one indifferent, and yet…

Certain words, like “caustics”, sound so bad and are so misknown (largely mistaken for acid chemicals or cleaning products), too many times dismissed as unimportant by 3D “artists”, causing backfiring awkwardness everytime they are mentioned for needing the mathematical realm to be described, and yet in real life they describe phenomenas of astonishing natural beauty

#caustics #stupidworld

12 Likes

Is that Luxcore?

1 Like

No sorry, it’s a real life picture. I am just here at a café drinking water and the sun just it the glass like that. It made me remember how, from back when I was using caustics with Mental Ray in 3DS 7 back in 2004, and to this day (and yes Luxcore does produce some of the bests caustics around) the general feeling progression and usage of caustics over almost 20 years… is almost zero taking the general mentality.

And it is much about this idea, that really beautiful phenomenas in life, always go along as concealed, hidden, and yet somehow protected, like always requiring a true effort to be perceived in their true glory.

(And yes you are absolutely right, I took this picture as reference to make it 3D render in Luxcore)

4 Likes

I was astounded by these caustics.

Real life is …well astounding. It is good to stop looking at screens and take in the real thing!

It would be interesting to see how close you can get.

5 Likes

Yeahh… but you know… it’s… complex…

and the other one is causticity :wink: …i guess

…and to spead up your render… you just fake it… like so:

or this one:

but then again…

But of course some payed apps do it better (and they should if you pay for them… :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye: )


 
 

By the way (because i was curious the other day): i wonder what’s the reason why (then) something like LuxCoreRender (and the “old” name LuxCore as a domain name heading to something totally different)… tells you something like:

Supported Blender versions: 2.82 to 2.93LTS. Will not work with v3.0+ .

Or also some other “tip” i followed:

Rendering Caustics in Blender with appleseed and Blenderseed

…but then on their offical website :

blenderseed is an appleseed plugin for Blender 2.79b and 2.8-2.92 only. 2.93 and up are NOT SUPPORTED.

( and maybe some unrelated… why for Mitsuba3 there is no single hint how to import any models… except on the OLD mitsuba-renderer page (mentioning onmly collada) )


 

…well… they seem to be not used that much…

:thinking: :person_shrugging:

2 Likes

If you access the debug properties for Path Guiding, you can tweak the percentage of guided samples to essentially tune Cycles into being more of a caustics solver (Directional Quadtree with a guiding percentage of 0.95 to 0.99). For surface samples, this works quite good with little to no bias being introduced. I have images in my sketchbook thread that shows the beautiful lighting details it adds.

Cycles has been able to do nice looking caustic effects before, but it took a lot of samples, and some details would still not be captured. OpenPGL’s introduction means FOSS not having a big hole blown in it when Luxcore stopped development (which I do believe became a high-risk project to rely on the moment it shrank to a one man show).

My goodness, I made such a poetical and yet technically accurate expression of how the ignorance of the many… And you come answering with exactly that mentality, my goodness, my goodness… My goodness!

Caustics have become really easy to render over the past decades. Fast, accurate and beautiful caustics. And several softwares are capable of that, some are free, some are more expensive, yes. But really anyone can render caustics, making some slight efforts obviously, but the efforts required are not much more than the 2 seconds 2 cents google research you made… So again, stop showboating the lamest excuses you find around.

And by the way, Luxcore 2.6 works in Blender 3.0+ … Just use the daily builds and maybe read the forums

“En fin, como dicen aquí en México, la hipotenusa”
(it’s a mexican expression, roughly translating to “you made my point that more accurate, by the exact way you tried to prove my point wrong”)

The material ahead is my own material, after all if one is going to talk about something, what a better way to use your own images. In no way I try to self promote, it’s just that I happen to have caustics renders experience of almost 20 years now… I would strongly suggest to go out there to live a little and fight in the front lines…

Here, an example, my first success with caustics in 3Ds MAX 7 and Mental Ray in 2005


Just imagine how much amazed I was to see 3D caustics taking life in one of my renders. And how amazingly my poor HP computer survived and delivered the render, without the power going out for 18 hours (in Mexico back in 2005 that was an amazing feat)

Now, almost 20 years after, caustics render in minutes, if not seconds, here some Luxcore examples

And here, Light Tracer 2.6, just to show another accesible software that makes caustics easy and fast.

! Warning crude language ahead ! Warning crude language ahead !
So no my dear, you don’t have to fake caustics like your girlfriend fake orgasms anymore, and it takes you less time to orgasm from the emotion of rendering caustics porn, than it takes you to orgams from watching regular porn.
! You can go back to your normal life ! You can go back to your normal life !

In what way do caustics sound bad? And maybe I’m just very old in the CG world, but I never even heard the word caustic meaning anything but these beautiful refractions. And I don’t think anyone very thought them to be unimportant, but instead most people think them as VERY expensive to render and therefor don’t even want to try it.

On the topic of caustics being expensive to render, there is this new addon called Shaders Plus that seem to do very fast and good looking caustics, not sure though how physically correct they are, but it could be worth a try for someone that wants more caustics in their life :slight_smile:

Sorry for the longish post… but this is not a rant… :smile_cat:

 
 


:question:

So… caustics are not complex… ? And everbody just get nice caustics by just enableing them…

What i tried to say was:
I think that’s exactly the main problem for some people… ( for myself also my un-powerfull system is a bit of a retention reason… and then again i tend to first want to know something about the things i do and not just tweak some bottons like some do… but this is a bit too off topic here :sweat_smile: ) likewise with HDRI… some do not understand them and others use them for everthing…
…but maybe my english was not got enough for that ??

And because anybody uses biased renderers there is also no need for using any quicker rendering enginee like for example EEVEE… and so nobody has to use any “tricks”…
Maybe you also didn’t read the lines between the videos because i wrote

and showed some where caustics are used… ( but they still need some additional render time… and nobody has time these day…which may explain your uproar… )

Isn’t this what i was trying to tell ??

Again: i do not understand your uproar against my words… you do not even have to mention your experience with caustics to make me believe you… caustics are another detail of realism which are aweseome to use … even in blender…


according LuxCoreRender:

(you may have noticed that i do know something about other renderer than the blender embedded ones )

isn’t it sad that someone can’t read about this directly on the webpage but

LuxInfo

…so since 3.0 this is “in developement” and someone has to dig this out from the forum…

anyway… i might even try this now… well not now now… but now i know that i can try this…

according LightTracer:

…interesting… never heard about this one… …but also i’m a bit puzzled… the website is with .org and then it’s payed… (starting with 10EUR/mo) ?? maybe not what i would use the next few month… but anyway… less than VRay (edu 15 EUR/mo) or Octane (~20 EUR/mo)

( there is also some disccusion about “realism” and sometimes caustics (??) in here : BA spectral-cycles-vs-octane)


And by the way…

…inspired by your photo i started to “investigate” caustics a liitle bit more using a simple glass with just some random displacement to make it “interesting” and then even start to draw a very simplicistic pattern… but because i totallt suck at materials and especially glas… my render test are still…
…oh in fact i ditched my last file… somethink like…

GlassUgly

…and now i have to re-member what i did to make it more nice… but in fact i was not very much better… :thinking: … so this may be an opportunity … ?? So here are several thing wrong… motsly because my displacement is only bump because real dispace seems to not work at all ( i don’t know why… did used this before…!?)… and here the caustics (shadow casutics) should be already enabled…

Anyway:

Maybe you can provide some more info or tips about caustics in general or espcailly with blender… ( influence of the virtual material, difference to real inhomogene material, influence of rough (geometry) and (or) fine dislpacement, for example real light parameters ( ← there is a term for this and some industry data collection i actualy don’t remember ), maybe even mutliple spots with some slight different color… :thinking: maybe this is already faking…) than reacting in this… ( i don’t even know how to call this ) maner ??

…and then playing arround for a while and not posting…

GlassUgl3

…so i may have to add some more interesting pattern onto the glass or even make some more changes as a tappered douber cylinder… for example at the bottom ( in fact there is none…) :sweat_smile:

So…
happy blending…


…and about your sentences after the !.. really ?? :smirk:
2 Likes

Thanks. Great to read all your emotions about caustics. Yes, caustics require much testing before coming out right. So yes GPU+CPU better be in good health.

And you clearly understood that nothing I said was personal, not even the last part (and don’t worry, my post was filtered by a moderator before hand, so I was clearly joking, that’s also why I put the warnings like I did).

So great to see that we are all here for the knowledge. There is a tutorial I made if you want to see caustics using Light Tracer (that render engine is not free, but I think they manage a descent price policy), anyway here https://youtu.be/j_nJlEA0qdg

I have made several Luxcore tutorials, but I never really published proper caustics tutorials using Luxcore, and I myself even wonder why. Like mentioned earlier, I indeed took this glass picture in the sun what that Luxcore tutorial in mind.

I love Blender Octane. Octane is one of the best render engines, but one obviously suffers of much slower renders for that quality.

Yes, caustics are easy, any body that enables them get wonderful caustics and wonderful renders :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl: (sometimes using caustics in renders make the render look worse than without :sweat_smile:)

I have a weird sense of humor, but it’s always to push people, question what we do and why we do it. My humor can be perceived as offensive but I play fair, the offense is not a goal, because I don’t like to be caustic, I mean toxic (pun intended :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:)

People who get that quickly become my friends, as they understand it’s all for learning, testing and experimenting all laughs included (I never liked boring learning and boring teaching)

In what way do caustics sound bad? Mmmmm let me see, well phonetically that would be just a subjective matter, although nebulae sound better (just an example, you can social experiment on words sounding better that others, social experiments on entire languages sounding better than others have been made for decades). Now also don’t forget that interdisciplinary comparisons can be made, very obviously smells or tastes can be honestly compared, and so does the sound of words, and on a large scale you will very easily and obviously find that smells, tastes and the sound of words can be much accurately be judged on scales of many types. Obviously it’s not about all people agreeing on such specifics, but we can very much all agree that flowers smell better than shit, or can’t we? Well, caustics doesn’t grade well either, not because I say it doesn’t per my own subjective judgment, caustics is not a nice sounding word.

You can also consider another cultural approach as why caustics sound bad, that by example, Boolean or Bezier, much used in the 3D environment, are much better thanks to the fact that these words were invented to honor the names of the mathematicians who described or discoverer them… that’s cool, to say the least. Now caustics has none of that. Caustics has not even such a link, and is just as mathematical as booleans and beziers elements. So for all of that, caustics might just as well be named Nebulae, and nobody would be upset, on the contrary.

And to make the matter worse, if you just make a 2 seconds search on Google (and honestly yes I am disappointed that you didn’t do it yourself)… Just have a look at all the vocabulary connections (yes I know in other fields, and sometimes without the final “s”, but yes I was talking that broadly when expressing my feelings about caustics, don’t you see just yet? Caustic acid, caustic person, caustics environment (no, not the 3D one, the real world ones), caustic destruction, caustic missiles, caustic sense of humour (like mine)… have all very very bad meanings and connections to bad things… that I am very much surprised of your question… And like we said, “caustics” do describe one of the most pretty and aesthetic natural phenomenon in life, just like God rays, see, see why caustics is such a wrong word? “Caustics” could be called “Angel rays”… and honestly you know what, yes caustics should undoubtedly be called “Angel rays”, definitely. And you don’t even need much imagination or sensitivity to come to such a conclusion.

But I am rewarding you one point for mentioning the SMouse Caustics Shaders addon, a true work of art.

2 Likes

Hehe… and now i also understand your passion… the Jewelry Jedi :+1:… you need this for that…
…also the title change just may catch some more people…

:cow: -sticks vs. :angel: -rays

 

:stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

3 Likes

Ha Ha, I think that is part of the point, I see beautiful caustics looking down when I go to the toilet!

They are everywhere! except in most CG. :rofl:

Wow, you really went to great lengths of explaining that word :slight_smile: And yeah it was a genuine question from me since I’ve never heard it been said in anything other than optics. English ain’t my native language though so that might be why.
Personally I do like the word though, I think it sounds nice, but that’s probably because I only connect it to those sexy refractions :slight_smile:

1 Like

for english speakers, they’ll probably come across the corrosive ‘caustic’ version first. while it’s not typically used in everyday conversation by ‘average joe’ anymore, they’ll certainly hear it by the time they get to basic chemistry in high school, if they haven’t heard it in the ‘that person is caustic’ context prior.

3d creation and optics is a less-traveled road for many, even if they see it everyday. typically when commenting on something caused by caustics, it’s much more likely they’ll just say “ooohh… pretty light!”, or ‘rainbow light’ as my wife will say due to dangling glass ornaments in the window. :smiley:

3 Likes

Thanks for describing your experience.
It’s exactly that, rainbow light… Scientists, mathematicians, 3D enthusiasts and like use “the correct term caustics” because it’s in the dictionary, and because “caustics” is the dictionary term, then it’s has to be the correct one to use. There is no questioning, there is no doubt, there is no emotional connection to the word, and they don’t care. Caustics is caustics no matter if it’s specific usage for describing one of the most beautiful light phenomenon was well thought or not…

And all the rest of the world uses any other sequence of words to describe these magnificent angel rays, play of light and colors, luckily ignorancing “the so to say correct term” yet, I insist, very badly coined for that usage, of caustics ( :cow: sticks like very on point said @Okidoki ) …

So basically we have one one side where ignorance is bliss in a positive manner, these lucky people ignore that there is a very ugly word scientifically out there describing sucu natural beauty, and these blessed people do care to use their imagination to come up with their own words to at least try to come up to the level of such beauty, like rainbow lights, magical light, fairy lights, angel lights, because one’s creative mind would never think an ugly word serve “as the official correct and best word” to talk about such aesthetic patterns of light. And it’s not even the problem that the word “caustics” is mathematical or scientific in nature that makes it correct, because like I said in another answer, “caustics” is not honoring or connected to any mathematician or scientist who would be hurt, betrayed or affected if the term “caustics” would come, as it should, to be coined differently, as the natural phenomon that the vocable is responsible of expressing and yet rails miserably at such task. I mean “caustics” had only one job, expressing the fantastic science and history and emotions of one specific light phenomenon, and it fails absolutely at that job. And mathematicians, scientists, and 3D professionals just give a damn about the real life emotions a word can cause, but, do they really don’t care, don’t they really never ask themselves, caustics caustics caustics, why the hell caustics is used for that?

And that’s ironic to say the least, because see, like we expressed earlier, the rest of the world, the non academic people, take a lot more care of using beautiful and creative words, knowingly making an effort and consciously looking for emotional connections with the word they use at the very moment of witnessing such admirable lights, showing how much they care about words and emotions… And you know what, the academic people (including all 3D folks, programers, etc…) should care at least twice as much.

You can very easily deduce that many such life experiences with loved ones, friends, students and fellow professionals, is the root of what made me write this post right from the beginning. I saw the sun hit that glass the other day, and “caustics” became so quickly a lame word choice… Anyone can do a very simple social experiment: find a kid around you, a cousin, a niece, idealy them having a limited vocabulary, as not knowing the words prior to the test (nebula and caustics being the word they should not know, obviously if yo have genius kids well… they agree anyway), so the test. Show them pictures of a nebula first, and have them describe it with their own words, as trying to find the official dictionary term, and then do the same with caustics, show them pictures of caustics, and have them use their words. Obviously don’t say the official words, not pior, nor during, and not now. Ok, once that you have showed them the pictures of nebulae and caustics and that they have described what they see and tried to coin a correct wording (yes despite their young age), start telling them the “correct” dictionary words, and above all beware and watch out for their emotions when hearing the words, their emotions, their reaction, the goal is to honestly discern their genuine first emotions when hearing a new word… then you’ll see, how underwhelming "caustics’ is, an anytime emotion and dream killer.

Rainbow lights, magic lights, fairy lights, angels lights, anything else will always be better than “the correct dictionary term”

1 Like

Yes, I understand. English is not my native language at all either. I didn’t even study english at school.

But see, you did perfect, “sexy refractions” is already so much better than :cow:sticks

Well… i’m almost sorry about my joke :sweat_smile: … but in fact i think it doesn’t sound that bad… not the joke… the name/term… maybe because i’m not a native english speaker… ?

Meanwhile i found some ref about the word in old greek καυστικός kaustikós, burning… and looking at the mathematical description… well focus, focal point, combustion point of a lense…

So maybe call them the lines of the burning cross… sounds somekind of epic

( re-reading this… it may sound like i’m makeing fun of something… actually i don’t … there is no smiley except in the first line :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye: ← and the last :wink: )

2 Likes

Ohh please… now stop repeating my joke… :wink:

1 Like

Bingo.

Caustics first were analyzed scientifically in the context of burning lenses or mirrors.

The subjective feelings about what they do have no bearing on the commonly agreed upon name.

But feel free to call them whatever you want. ‘God Rays’ are just a more user friendly way to describe crepuscular rays (also, a kinda yucky feeling word). So why not call them angel rays?

I mean other than the fact that most people won’t know what you are talking about.

1 Like