practice continue LWF

tell ninyo ako kung mali ang LWF ko mga master.

at tips naman dyan. Thank you in advance


[img] [/img]

ito tip...

tingin ka sa salamin...





nakikita mo na ba si wolverine?

[ako parang nakikita ko na...]

M_Shadows wrote:ito tip...

tingin ka sa salamin...





nakikita mo na ba si wolverine?

[ako parang nakikita ko na...]

what you mean tol si wolverine?

trox wrote:

M_Shadows wrote:ito tip...

tingin ka sa salamin...





nakikita mo na ba si wolverine?

[ako parang nakikita ko na...]

what you mean tol si wolverine?

mabangis?

BTW you could post settings so we could comment.Kahit non LWF kaya maachieve ganitong output.

yaug_03 wrote:

trox wrote:

M_Shadows wrote:ito tip...

tingin ka sa salamin...





nakikita mo na ba si wolverine?

[ako parang nakikita ko na...]

what you mean tol si wolverine?

mabangis?

BTW you could post settings so we could comment.Kahit non LWF kaya maachieve ganitong output.

hmmm i'll try sir
i know sir na makhua yan sa sipling settings but all of my colors and textures has gamma corrected on 2.2..

- Check enable gamma / LUT Correction
- on diplay put gamma on (2.2)
- check affect color
- check affect material editor
- input leave to (1.0)
- output leave to (1.0)

render settings

- enable VRAY frame buffer
- global switches
- check max depth on reflection/rafraction and set to 5
- Default light off
- Color mappimg
- Linear Multiply
- Dark muliplier set to 1.0
- Bright set to 0.45 or .5
- Gamma 2.2
- check affect backgorund
- check affect colors
- Image sampler
- Adaptive Subdivision
- uncheck Antiliising Filter

-Adaptive sub settings
- leave all
- set Clr thrs 0.001

turn on GI
- check Ambient onclusion
- 0.8
- 25 mm amount
- 8 subdvs
primary
- IR map
- Min rate -5
- max rate - 2
- color thrs 0.3
- nrm thrs 0.1
- dist thrs 0.1
- hsph subds 100
seconddary
-Light cache subdvs 600 only

settings tab
DMC sampler
leave all
VRAY system change max tree depth to 60



on material editor
when using texture or diffuse map use overide material and set to (2.2)
when using color use VRAY color..right click copy the color on VRAY material and paste in VRAY color and select specify and change the gamma to 2.2

here sir

.


paturo naman di-an...

M_Shadows wrote:ito tip...

tingin ka sa salamin...





nakikita mo na ba si wolverine?

[ako parang nakikita ko na...]

Like


.

oRangE.n.GreeN wrote:.


paturo naman di-an...

M_Shadows wrote:ito tip...

tingin ka sa salamin...





nakikita mo na ba si wolverine?

[ako parang nakikita ko na...]

Like


.

diyan na settings ko sir oh..

trox wrote:hmmm i'll try sir
i know sir na makhua yan sa sipling settings but all of my colors and textures has gamma corrected on 2.2..

render settings
- Bright set to 0.45 or .5
- Gamma 2.2
- check affect colors

-Adaptive sub settings
- set Clr thrs 0.001

primary
- hsph subds 100

here sir

question...

- did you figure out these settings by yourself? i wonder if leaving the bright set to its default
contributes to the previous washout post you had... or you got the same settings for both?

- you didnt mention your wf i think. i suppose you dint post pro in ps coz you burned the gamma in, right?

- i also remember you used to experiment with brute force before and that took you about 8hours???
how about this one? how long did you render this coz you pretty much got high clr thrs and hsph subds....




*di mo pala kilala si wolverine? sa palagid ligid lang yun.... hanaaaaapin moooo....

[clue - halimaw din siya ng sketchup]

Adjust mo pa konti sa frame buffer para lumabas ang pagkaputi ng walls.

to be honest may mali sa lwf mo sir. sa color mapping palang may mali na.. raw render ba ito sir? pwede mong icolor correct pa sa ps ito..

M_Shadows wrote:

trox wrote:hmmm i'll try sir
i know sir na makhua yan sa sipling settings but all of my colors and textures has gamma corrected on 2.2..

render settings
- Bright set to 0.45 or .5
- Gamma 2.2
- check affect colors

-Adaptive sub settings
- set Clr thrs 0.001

primary
- hsph subds 100

here sir

question...

- did you figure out these settings by yourself? i wonder if leaving the bright set to its default
contributes to the previous washout post you had... or you got the same settings for both?

- you didnt mention your wf i think. i suppose you dint post pro in ps coz you burned the gamma in, right?

- i also remember you used to experiment with brute force before and that took you about 8hours???
how about this one? how long did you render this coz you pretty much got high clr thrs and hsph subds....




*di mo pala kilala si wolverine? sa palagid ligid lang yun.... hanaaaaapin moooo....

[clue - halimaw din siya ng sketchup]

si edward castro yan tol si wolverine

no Photoshop tol just VFB

it Takes only35 mins

Yup tol para mawala ang wash out binabaan ko talaga ang Multiplier niya sa .454..
TY talaga Shadow..

RQUI wrote:to be honest may mali sa lwf mo sir. sa color mapping palang may mali na.. raw render ba ito sir? pwede mong icolor correct pa sa ps ito..

so bali dapat 1,1,1 lahat sir? iyon din ang pinoprob ko sir eh

tips naman diyan sir.

its not what it is... paki screen grab ung settings para ma point out... mahirap ung tina-type mo lang, katamad basahin... un eh kung gusto mo matuto ha...

trox wrote:

RQUI wrote:to be honest may mali sa lwf mo sir. sa color mapping palang may mali na.. raw render ba ito sir? pwede mong icolor correct pa sa ps ito..

so bali dapat 1,1,1 lahat sir? iyon din ang pinoprob ko sir eh

tips naman diyan sir.

it's 1/1/2.2 @ Linear Multiply

ERICK wrote:its not what it is... paki screen grab ung settings para ma point out... mahirap ung tina-type mo lang, katamad basahin... un eh kung gusto mo matuto ha...

OT: paki screen grab din yung settings nung "the making" mo Mr. Torio

gusto ko rin matuto - pero di ko talaga siya makita - SWEAR

TIA

@TS - sipag mo mag type, in fairness...

M_Shadows wrote:

ERICK wrote:its not what it is... paki screen grab ung settings para ma point out... mahirap ung tina-type mo lang, katamad basahin... un eh kung gusto mo matuto ha...

OT: paki screen grab din yung settings "the making" mo Mr. Torio - gusto ko rin matuto - pero di ko talaga siya makita - SWEAR

OT din: Oh god, have lot of things to do here in the office... compile ko na lang sa thru pdf if time permits... (palusot)

@ TS - you might as well view that dude, may settings ako dun, LWF din...

http://www.vrayguide.com/2010/11/lwf-linear-vs-exponential/

sundan mo lang yan lahat sir.

tip ko lang siguro huwag mong baguhin ang setting ng LWF.. lalo na dyan sa color mapping.. leave it that way, pure color... kung matapang ang kulay or desaturated, its either your lighting setup or camera setting ang adjust mo...

Goodluck and don't stop taking comments/critics dyan ka magiimprove lalo na't masipag ka sir..

ERICK wrote:

trox wrote:

RQUI wrote:to be honest may mali sa lwf mo sir. sa color mapping palang may mali na.. raw render ba ito sir? pwede mong icolor correct pa sa ps ito..

so bali dapat 1,1,1 lahat sir? iyon din ang pinoprob ko sir eh

tips naman diyan sir.

it's 1/1/2.2 @ Linear Multiply

Ok sir kaso nandun pa sa Bahay eh.. pero yan talaga ang settings ko..

there you go... rqui posted the video that really helped me... goodluck dude...

RQUI wrote:http://www.vrayguide.com/2010/11/lwf-linear-vs-exponential/

sundan mo lang yan lahat sir.

tip ko lang siguro huwag mong baguhin ang setting ng LWF.. lalo na dyan sa color mapping.. leave it that way, pure color... kung matapang ang kulay or desaturated, its either your lighting setup or camera setting ang adjust mo...

Goodluck and don't stop taking comments/critics dyan ka magiimprove lalo na't masipag ka sir..

TY tol Rqui... susundin ko yan tol.. dont worry i will.. araw2 ako nag papractice..

My take on this whole LWF/Gamma correction fracas:
--There's probably a thousand ways to go about this workflow; each with varying results, some with very similar results although done in a different workflow. The END RESULT is really what matters. It may be THE standard nowadays but if you know all the processes involved and still getting crappy outputs compared to your previous non-LWF outputs, then by all means go back to old school. Going LWF does have certain advantages, but if you can get the same output using your old methods without losing too much of the advantages of LWF, well, thats a no-brainer. Now if you're really set on having a LWF workflow, find one process that gets the desired output you want and stick with that. STOP COMPARING LWF TECHNIQUES. Even if you copied someone else's lwf technique up to the minute detail, you may NOT still get the output you so admire from that person, because of OTHER factors not lwf related. Like how lighting is set up, the colors you choose, or like, TALENT? Make your OWN lwf and get comfy with that. Even the best visualizers around have their OWN techniques and produce varied but nonetheless great outputs.
I for one can never tell you that your workflow is wrong. There is no wrong or right here. Like someone around here said before (sorry I forgot who it was): IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE RIGHT, IT JUST HAS TO LOOK GOOD.

Ad infinitum..

ERICK wrote:there you go... rqui posted the video that really helped me... goodluck dude...

yup sir erick.. panonoorin ko to..

cloud20 wrote:My take on this whole LWF/Gamma correction fracas:
--There's probably a thousand ways to go about this workflow; each with varying results, some with very similar results although done in a different workflow. The END RESULT is really what matters. It may be THE standard nowadays but if you know all the processes involved and still getting crappy outputs compared to your previous non-LWF outputs, then by all means go back to old school. Going LWF does have certain advantages, but if you can get the same output using your old methods without losing too much of the advantages of LWF, well, thats a no-brainer. Now if you're really set on having a LWF workflow, find one process that gets the desired output you want and stick with that. STOP COMPARING LWF TECHNIQUES. Even if you copied someone else's lwf technique up to the minute detail, you may NOT still get the output you so admire from that person, because of OTHER factors not lwf related. Like how lighting is set up, the colors you choose, or like, TALENT? Make your OWN lwf and get comfy with that. Even the best visualizers around have their OWN techniques and produce varied but nonetheless great outputs.
I for one can never tell you that your workflow is wrong. There is no wrong or right here. Like someone around here said before (sorry I forgot who it was): IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE RIGHT, IT JUST HAS TO LOOK GOOD.

Ad infinitum..

I think it was torvicz.

cloud20 wrote:My take on this whole LWF/Gamma correction fracas:
--There's probably a thousand ways to go about this workflow; each with varying results, some with very similar results although done in a different workflow. The END RESULT is really what matters. It may be THE standard nowadays but if you know all the processes involved and still getting crappy outputs compared to your previous non-LWF outputs, then by all means go back to old school. Going LWF does have certain advantages, but if you can get the same output using your old methods without losing too much of the advantages of LWF, well, thats a no-brainer. Now if you're really set on having a LWF workflow, find one process that gets the desired output you want and stick with that. STOP COMPARING LWF TECHNIQUES. Even if you copied someone else's lwf technique up to the minute detail, you may NOT still get the output you so admire from that person, because of OTHER factors not lwf related. Like how lighting is set up, the colors you choose, or like, TALENT? Make your OWN lwf and get comfy with that. Even the best visualizers around have their OWN techniques and produce varied but nonetheless great outputs.
I for one can never tell you that your workflow is wrong. There is no wrong or right here. Like someone around here said before (sorry I forgot who it was): IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE RIGHT, IT JUST HAS TO LOOK GOOD.

Ad infinitum..

ok sir.. Thank you kaya nga sir iniiba2 ko ang mga settings ko siguro naka 8 na settings na ako na save.. na hindi nag dedepende sa mga tuts.. basta practice lang ako ng practice sir.. hanggang ma satisfy na ako.. siguro sa lightnings and camera nalang ako.. iwan basta practice pa ako..

@TS, please don't misinterpret; practice is a must naman talaga. My 2 centavos above was just to keep you from swimming too deep into the mire without finding out what you were looking for. Lighting (hindi lightnings ha kidlats yun) and the camera set-up is basic in setting up a scene; everything else follows.

Good luck!