2.29: radiosity render!

General discussion about the development of the open source Blender

Moderators: jesterKing, stiv

theeth
Posts: 500
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 5:47 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by theeth »

because IIRC, it's the specular lighting that creates bumps, not the diffuse.

Martin
Life is what happens to you when you're busy making other plans.
- John Lennon

Landis
Posts: 0
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 11:45 pm

Post by Landis »

Ok, couple extra notes on the new radiosity feature.

If you DO plan on completing the calculation PRIOR to render time, it is imperative that the "Radio" button be disabled in the display buttons or Blender will think that it is still neccessary to make the calculation. If you fail to do so do not be alarmed! You have'nt lost your old data, simply exit the render process (escape) and deactivate the radio button inside of the display buttons, re-render, and voila. As obvious as this may seem, it got me last night. Also, it seems as though the "one stop shop", "click all of the radio buttons and render" does not provide anything NEAR the results that are capable through tweaking some of the settings inside of the radiosity buttons.

More to come as I learn :wink: .

Thanks again for the great new toy.

Cheers,
Landis

ton
Site Admin
Posts: 350
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 12:13 am
Contact:

Post by ton »

Eeek, 2 days not reading it here and it floods with nice examples and feedback!

For people who try bumpmapping; the blender radiosity only calculates and distributes the energy *per face*, and it displays it during render Gouraud shaded using interpolated vertex values.
For bumpmapping, you need a per-pixel normal to be perturbed.

So, this is really a separate 'shader', with features especially for global illumunation/ambient effects. For nice specularity and bump you still need the normal lamps.

The hemires resolution is now global... maybe I might better move this to a Material, and the shader buttons? Then you can tweak it more based at the actual geometry.

I also tried some extra filtering methods, to smooth out aliasing errors with extreme small faces. Didnt look really good yet, is for later.

Another warning; it also doesn't work well for irregular faces. Try a Metaball for example...

Landis
Posts: 0
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 11:45 pm

Post by Landis »

ton wrote:For people who try bumpmapping; the blender radiosity only calculates and distributes the energy *per face*, and it displays it during render Gouraud shaded using interpolated vertex values.
For bumpmapping, you need a per-pixel normal to be perturbed.

So, this is really a separate 'shader', with features especially for global illumunation/ambient effects. For nice specularity and bump you still need the normal lamps.
So, if one was to attempt to fake an effect such as bump mapping, would you suggest perhaps setting up the same scene with standard lamps in the locations where my light source is to be located for the radiosity version, and later compositing the two renders (standard lamp and radiosity) together? This would obviously be aimed more towards stills....applying the radiosity render as a multiply layer to the standard unified render inside of a 2d application such as photoshop or the gimp. I dont know, just throwing out ideas.

Cheers,
Landis

ton
Site Admin
Posts: 350
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 12:13 am
Contact:

Post by ton »

No, far too complex!
Normal lamps and radiosity can be mixed in one rendering pass.

The 'ambient' slider in a Material can be used to control the radiosity component. Experiment with it.

Or use theeth's tip; a specular-only lamp for a bump effect.

Landis
Posts: 0
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 11:45 pm

Post by Landis »

Hmmm....ambient settings...I will try this. For now this is what I got using my method previously discussed:


Image

This is a pretty primitive test render in that it only excercises a greyscale radiosity render for the multiply layer...meaning that there is no color bleeding to take into account which is the basis of radiosity's significance, so, I will provide another example soon. By the way...this is the actual model I used for the Blender tutorial I wrote for 3D World. It is turkish pottery. I picked it and many others up while being deployed to Incirlik Air Base. Anyways, take care. More to come!

Cheers,
Landis
Last edited by Landis on Fri Sep 05, 2003 1:04 am, edited 7 times in total.

Money_YaY!
Posts: 442
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 2:47 pm

Post by Money_YaY! »

silly stupid idea Ton. But now while your at the codeing again, and bump mapping seems to be a bit of a problem, why not work at makeing a new "Normal mapping" ? You could make sure that it intergrates well with the new radioicity stuff.

And plus blender needs normal mapping, so you could add another reason why people should move to blender and game shtuff

^v^

slikdigit
Posts: 133
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 3:52 am
Location: Northampton, MA (US)

Post by slikdigit »

Last night I opened an old .blend, put in some radio lights and rendered an animation. only 1:03 minutes on average per frame. (I got bored waiting and went to sleep, but thats not bad for animation) no other lighting technique used:
http://home.comcast.net/~kurdali/testrad.avi
Its nothing new, but I enjoyed the lights. I'll do a nice one sometime soon.
Bassam

hanzo
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 9:56 am

Post by hanzo »

wow nice render Landis, :D :idea: good job...
EDITed
hey slikdigit GJ 8) make it longer!
Last edited by hanzo on Fri Sep 05, 2003 6:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

sten
Posts: 177
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2002 7:47 pm

Post by sten »

to both slikdigit and Landis:

wow....cool stuff from both of you...I must play some more this weekend with the radio....money has drained, so now I need to slow down hehe ;)

nempko
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 4:30 pm

Post by nempko »

This radiosity feature is just what i was looking for. Before i had to fake radiosity with many many laps which took a very long time to render, now i can render much more quickly with this feature with better results. I found bump mapping not to be a problem by putting in a very dim lamp which did not effect the scene in a noticable way, but reveal the cute bumps as they say in some cultures. I LOVE IT!

Landis
Posts: 0
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 11:45 pm

Post by Landis »

Just to clear up any possible confusion (especially for newbies) regarding Blender's Radiosity documentation:

http://download.blender.org/documentati ... osity.html

After having "replaced meshes" in the radiosity buttons, as you all know Blender will merge all of the meshes in the scene into one single mesh which could be catastrophic for procedurals. Now, this obviously only applies if you plan to follow the documentation steps discussed in the link above, and does not apply if you plan to do the calculation the new way (during render time). There should be another step in the current documentation that addresses this, perhaps with a note that states when this is neccessary and when it is not. Here is what we have at the moment See below.
Blender Radiosity documentation wrote: 4. To leave the Radiosity mode and save the results press "Replace Meshes" and "Free Radio Data". Now we have a new Mesh Object with vertex colors. There's also a new Material added with the right proprties to render it (Press F5 or F12).
If someone has followed these steps (manually performed the calculation prior to render time) and they are using image textures that are mapped using the procedural method, then the something close to the following should be adressed:

First select the scene (since the entire scene is now a single mesh) and enter edit mode. Then, hold the cursor over top of any vertice and hit the L key. What this does is it selects all of the vertices of the ORIGINAL mesh (whatever vertice you were cursing over prior to hitting the L key will determine which mesh). Next seperate (P) them from the rest of the vertices. Repeat this step until all of your meshes are restored to the way that they were before you made the calculation. Finally, give it a render and your in there :wink: ! .

Hope this makes sense. I am also going to send this to the docboard.

Cheers,
Landis

soletread
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2003 7:11 pm

Post by soletread »

Thanks Landis. This helps a great deal.

One question: When the new Radiosity implimentation is perfected, will it replace the old one?

---------------

ton
Site Admin
Posts: 350
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 12:13 am
Contact:

Post by ton »

The purpose is to present the new system as default behaviour, as an extra rendering option, like environment mapping.

The old options then will be presented as "Radiosity Tool", assisting in:
- previews or finetuning of radiosity rendering options
- a modling tool to make Meshes with vertex color lighting info. (for export, or usage in engine)

Only for 'radiosity tool' the 16 Material limit exists. I think of removing the "replace meshes" and just keep the 'add new mesh' without copying the old Materials to it.

-Ton-
________________
Save the emos!

sten
Posts: 177
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2002 7:47 pm

Post by sten »

Landis wrote:Hmmm....ambient settings...I will try this. For now this is what I got using my method previously discussed:


Image

This is a pretty primitive test render in that it only excercises a greyscale radiosity render for the multiply layer...

...Cheers,
Landis
I love it!

you are the master of nice light and material ;) No wonder your little dude ended up in 3D world magazine! :D

Post Reply