Lighting issues in a stadium

Get feedback on your current artwork.
Liverpudlian82
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:15 am
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Wed May 06, 2020 8:23 am

Thx, I'll change the settings and show the result when I am back from work tonight :)
User avatar
saurus
Licensed User v1.5
Licensed User v1.5
Posts: 1097
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:12 am
Location: Serbia
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 54 times
Contact:

Wed May 06, 2020 9:28 am

Try not to use Filmic. It adds a lot of blackness. I would also add Fog (air perspective) and Depth of field
User avatar
mrwip
Thea Beta Tester
Thea Beta Tester
Posts: 694
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 8:12 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 118 times

Wed May 06, 2020 11:51 am

saurus wrote:
Wed May 06, 2020 9:28 am
Try not to use Filmic. It adds a lot of blackness. I would also add Fog (air perspective) and Depth of field
Well, sorry Saurus, but I must completely disagree with you on the subject of Filmic. To me it's one of the best addition to Thea in the last few years.
The results are much better in term of contrast and "photorealism" of the colors. It's true that the factory settings are a bit too dark (Highlights 90 / shadows 15), but if you tweek them a bit (H 70 / S 5), it gaves great results.

I did a quick test on a similar stadium found on the warehouse :

STANDARD :
STADIUM Standard.jpg
FILMIC (factory settings)
STADIUM Filmic.jpg
FILMIC (Adjusted)
STADIUM Filmic 2.jpg
User avatar
mrwip
Thea Beta Tester
Thea Beta Tester
Posts: 694
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 8:12 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 118 times

Wed May 06, 2020 11:52 am

And fog could give good results, but it takes a lot longer to render as it creates quite a lots of noise, and it's a bit difficult to make it subtle (not enough low values)
STADIUM fog.jpg
User avatar
jenujacob
Licensed User v1.5
Licensed User v1.5
Posts: 409
Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 5:44 pm
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Wed May 06, 2020 12:31 pm

saurus wrote:
Wed May 06, 2020 9:28 am
Try not to use Filmic. It adds a lot of blackness. I would also add Fog (air perspective) and Depth of field
I too think filmic is a great addition... i never realized why there was a difference in the look and feel of the renders until i saw this video :

These users thanked the author jenujacob for the post:
werthen (Wed May 06, 2020 7:40 pm)
Rating: 4%
Win10 x64 | Intel i7-3930K| GeForce GTX 680 4gb DDR | GeForce 630GT| 32Gb Ram
Liverpudlian82
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:15 am
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Wed May 06, 2020 6:09 pm

So here is the updated picture.

Image

Setting turbidty to 4.5 got rid of the blueish reflection :)

For the goal nettings I just made the material a passive emitter. Slight improvement I think

For the main problem I found that changing the tracing depth value did not have any noticable effect. The picture above was done with ambient occlusion at a minimal intensity of .4.

I tried out fog as well, but did not like it too much.

I am reasonably happy with the lighting now. It certainly looks much more photorealistic than any of my previous attempts thanks to the filmic option :)

Thanks for everybodys advice!
User avatar
mrwip
Thea Beta Tester
Thea Beta Tester
Posts: 694
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 8:12 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 118 times

Thu May 07, 2020 7:10 am

Did you try with no AO and no diffuse depth ? It will be more realistic, as AO comes with an ambient lighting systems which does not gives a photorealistic looks.

You can get better results if you then adjust the highlights / shadows.
User avatar
saurus
Licensed User v1.5
Licensed User v1.5
Posts: 1097
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:12 am
Location: Serbia
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 54 times
Contact:

Fri May 08, 2020 11:32 am

mrwip wrote:
Wed May 06, 2020 11:51 am
Well, sorry Saurus, but I must completely disagree with you on the subject of Filmic. To me it's one of the best addition to Thea in the last few years.
The results are much better in term of contrast and "photorealism" of the colors. It's true that the factory settings are a bit too dark (Highlights 90 / shadows 15), but if you tweek them a bit (H 70 / S 5), it gaves great results.
I also find Filmic great add on and I use it almost all the time :D . But, as you yourself showed in the examples, in some pictures it can make some areas too dark, which was one of the problems in question. So I tried to be short, and try first without Filmic . The tweeking of the shadows settings made the difference too.
User avatar
saurus
Licensed User v1.5
Licensed User v1.5
Posts: 1097
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:12 am
Location: Serbia
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 54 times
Contact:

Fri May 08, 2020 11:40 am

mrwip wrote:
Wed May 06, 2020 11:52 am
And fog could give good results, but it takes a lot longer to render as it creates quite a lots of noise, and it's a bit difficult to make it subtle (not enough low values)
As far as I know you can set any value now, by typing in. It has problems with HDR light, but, with Sun only, when you set low value it adds to realism. Air perspective is a must in nature paintings...I just guessed. It doesn't hurt to try :)
User avatar
dbalex
Thea Beta Tester
Thea Beta Tester
Posts: 1502
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 6:52 pm
Location: Brussels / Belgium
Has thanked: 156 times
Been thanked: 129 times
Contact:

Sat May 09, 2020 6:16 am

Filmic: Highlights to 85 And shadows to 15 is giving a too strong contrast, try Highlights at 50 and shadows at 4.
Set the iso higher because it probably darkened the overall image

Render settings: waaaaay too high, go back to defaults, uncheck diffuse depth and put tracing depth back to somewhere around 5-10. Add maybe a tad of ambient occlusion but very subtle, like 0.1 and 1m
These users thanked the author dbalex for the post:
saurus (Mon May 11, 2020 12:47 pm)
Rating: 4%
Post Reply

Return to “Work in Progress”