Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
popol

Blender Tutorials

Recommended Posts

Petit step by step pour configurer correctement blender et opencolorIO pour pouvoir profiter d'ACES

IMG_6916_BG_comp_and_grade_UHD_out_rec70

https://www.toodee.de/?page_id=1720

Quote

Download the OpenColoIO config for ACES 1.1 from this link:
github.com/colour-science/OpenColorIO-Configs/tree/feature/aces-1.1-config
Unzip and place the config in your user folder or on a server location.
Set a system variable for OCIO to this path to use it for all applications that supports it and don’t have an option in the preferences to set the path manually.
Or start Blender with the variable set only for Blender.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tu te trompe complètement 🤣, je commence juste à m'y intéresser un peut plus en profondeur grâce à la 2.8. Malheureusement y'a toujours quelques souci qui ne vont  pas me faire lâcher clarisse et houdini de si tôt, mais c'est quand même le jours et la nuit entre la 2.8 et les précédente release :o

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honnêtement ça vaut le coup de ce lancer, le retour sur temps investi est assez hallucinant :o

Feedback quasi instantané, capacité incroyable a manger du polygone (quand tu passe le cap du billion de prim dans ton viewport ça fais un choc 🤣 ).

Rien que cette video de présentation du viewport accélérer via gpu fais baver (regarde le nombre de prims affichées)

pour un feedback complet je te laisse lire ce qui suit et qui résume bien le fond de ma pensé :D :

Quote

Sorry I'm late to the party. I have some information from the horses mouth lets say. I worked at Dneg for a long time. I've used Maya/Renderman Houdini/Mantra and Maya/Clarisse, all at Dneg working on big productions. I've since quit and joined Isotropix to help them develop Clarisse. I am not here to slam any software. Much like Pizza, in 2017 all the softwares are pretty damn amazing. And at this point, the ability of software to render a beautiful image far outweighs the number of amazing ideas we have to produce images from.

Quick story: I worked on one show at a big company in London where I was using Katana for one sequence and Clarisse for another, it's a pretty recent movie about a spanish guy who ballet dances on rooftops during the Spanish Inquisition I think. On the Clarisse sequence, it was an outdoors set extension shot, massive geo. Because of the fast feedback you get with Clarisse, I was able to get my 1st pass lighting direction almost instantly. I was able to adjust lighting to get exact shadows to fall on exact balconies without so much as a 15 second test render. So quickly was this able to happen, that they got carried away and I did so many versions simply because I could get so many "quality" versions in dailies each day. Annoyingly I think my lighting slap comp got up in the v97 range, that's some SERIOUS iteration.

When i went back to my scene in the Katana sequence, I had a note to adjust some lighting angles. I was looking at probably 1 hour to get 3 to 5 test renders, and my heart sank. And that was my "Clarisse" moment, I didn't want to wait for a test render anymore now that I knew I didn't have to.

This real time lighting feedback, weather you get it in Clarisse or you have some in house tools, can't be over stated. When using Clarisse, you can move objects to get perfect shadows, or reflections where you want them. You do layouts with shadow and light in mind, and reflections. This never happened once in my entire CG career before this and it blew my mind. No more test renders, think about it.

Doing look dev and seeing the results in real time as you adjust, say a roughness slider, is a game changer as well. You get to 80% results in Clarisse faster than with any other product I believe that. Paint your textures in Substance, export them, drop them on a Clarisse Standard material and your at 80%

The software does not require a GPU, enabling you to have a much lower spec machine and still be able to produce amazing results.

Clarisse can also handle VDBs extremely well. So you start rendering your FX as part of your lighting passes in Clarisse instead of speratly in Houdini. So now, in a production environment, you don't have to mange all the issues that come from rendering your FX separate from your CG. "Oh my FX cache is out of date" "Oh I don't have the latest lighting for my FX render" all that is over. FX department can make a library of smokes/fires and the Lighting TDs can place them. This covers a TON of FX use cases, and frees up the FX dudes to focus on iteration on the BIG FX...not constantly moving smoke stacks from chimney to chimney on a dozen shots every week.

Also because it handles VDBs so well, you start doing less projections and things like that. If you have a sequence where a huge storm is rolling in you can layout the storm with REAL (VDB) objects, just like any other. You can build the storm front in CG. So, unlike using projections, you can just move the camera around freely. If the Director changes the camera, that's fine, just move it and hit render. Projection setups are usually 1 use for 1 angle. A real VDB layout can be used over and over for many many different angles. 12 shot sequence might have had 12 layouts, 12 projection tasks. Now you will have 1 storm layout and a single lighting TD could render all 12 shots if need be.

It's a beautiful render and renders 1:1 results with Arnold if you put the same settings in the shader. The reason you render in Clarisse, is because when you have a frozen ice planet with a quadrillion polygon space station embedded within it and the entire thing is exploding with VDB explosion caches all over the place.......no other software can render it. This is why Clarisse is very popular in generalist departments, and if you look on the isotropix demo reel, you will see some of the bigger shots in Star Wars.

Another thing to consider is workflows. If you no longer have to make proxy objects, and no longer do you have to fake things, you no longer have to waste time making fake things so you can work. Bump maps, displacement maps, normal maps all those are hacks. If you can do it with polygons you will usually (always?) get a better more photo real result. One studio using Clarisse no longer does any UVs, they model EVERYTHING. Numbers on a clock, modeled. All that time saved NOT doing UVs is spent on making a higher resolution model. Which, at the end of the day will produce a better image IMO. And potentially may live longer in their library for further use down the road.

Workflows like Photogrametry are now a viable workflow for real productions since you no longer have to care about polygons. Imagine trying to model a huge swamp, with all the foliage and dripping vines, broken trees and general "mossy stuff" hanging everywhere. Fact is you will never model it, ever. You can take photos and project it in a particular shot. But this is an unchangeable and set in stone workflow, if the camera changes your photographs are no longer valid.

However if you go use Photogrametry to build real life objects and render them in CG, you can bring realism to your render. It's the CG equivalent of using elements in your 2d comps, and I think anyone who's done that job will know that elements are always needed. With elements you bring realty into your final image, with Photogrametry you bring you bring that same element or actual realism to your 3d render.

The negatives are that it does have a higher mouse millage. However the interface is totally modal, so you end up making all sorts of little tools (just using the features, not code or python, although you could) that speed up workflow. It's a new way to think about your 3d scenes layout in terms of interface. It took me a while to understand the "Browser" and I used the Explorer view to make me feel comfortable. I haven't used explorer view it in years now.

A given scene, if your raytracing everything, will take roughly the same amount of time to render in Clarisse, Vray or Arnold. Where Clarisse helps you is on the front end. No more waiting for your lighting wedge to finish rendering. No more applying 3 or 4 versions of settings on a shader then sending them to the farm, so you can just pick one that's close.....and then keep on adjusting and test rendering for another afternoon.

Just figure out what you need to do for your project and pick the right tools. So far it seems that a lot of studios point of entry is this generalist department. But then when they see what can be done it gets used more and more.

Compared to Katana in a very big production, it wont be as easy to have a lead to setup a Katana lighting setup. Then clip things here for this sequence and add that there for these shots and add 1 more light for those 10 shots, then shove that all down to a team of 100 artist. I think that Katana at the moment is easier to do that, and although I've never worked there I believe this is how MPC works.

However I think Star Trek Beyond is a pretty big film, Ant Man, Star Wars...etc. So anything is possible and we're working on making the above setups easier to setup. But say this tool can or can't do this or that in terms of it's ability to fit in a pipeline and produce great shots is probably not very true of many professional softwares these days.

For me simply because of the speed of feedback, and the ability to generate a large environment with instancing, Clarisse lets the individual freelancer do the work of a small FX house. The small FX house can now compete with the larger ones. And the generalist department at the larger studios get to do the biggest and baddest ass shots in the films.

I'll be plugged in here and if anyone has any questions I'm here to answer, we're a small company and just starting to get time to be involved in places like this forum.

THANKS!!!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lecture très instructive, @popol, merci beaucoup.

Et puis, je vois que Clarisse gère le RTX maintenant, ça m'intéresse d'autant plus que j'ai changé de carte graphique il y a quelques jours :)

Bon, bah, pas le choix, le temps est semble-t-il venu de remettre Clarisse sur ma to-test-list ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...