User Tag List

Results 1 to 40 of 40

Thread: Unreal take on Loft.

  1. #1
    0

    Unreal take on Loft.

    Hi Friends,

    Created this loft space to test lighting and materials.

    Inspired from - http://www.archdaily.com/451601/san-francisco-loft-lineoffice-architecture




































    Last edited by Raghu; 10-15-2015 at 07:29 AM.

  2. #2
    0
    Very nice, great work! The brick walls need some improvements tho ^^

  3. #3
    0
    super slick man! can i ask how one goes about getting folds that awesome in your comforter? Zbrush i'm guessing?

  4. #4
    0
    very nice- so crisp!
    environment | arch vis artist | serriffe.com

  5. #5
    0
    Looks good! Don't you ever sleep?

  6. #6
    0
    Very, very good job!!! Have you changed the settings in BaseLightmass.ini?

  7. #7
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by mihanix View Post
    Very, very good job!!! Have you changed the settings in BaseLightmass.ini?
    Changed few values in BaseLightmass.ini (only started to getting some understanding of it), still wrapping my head around photon mapping in Unreal. Don't know why EPIC is not helping out artists regarding the workflow concerning Photon Mapping for realistic renders. I am more then happy to help but my own results are based on experiments with loose understanding of some values. Still very much struggling to solve so many problems in lighting. EPIC documents are not at all helpful.

    We all know Rafeal and Koola are able to get the results we all desire (not talking about artistic look, but technically their renders are almost without bugs), so technique is there to overcome all the hurdles, but EPIC is not willing to share the workflow.

    Why not make a making of - Unreal Paris - explaining every part, including Lightmass Settings (We all know the values which are available to "artist" are not at all helpful) with BaseLIghtmass.ini tweaking (it is not possible to get that kind of result without touching that ini file) , Proper Unwrapping techniques to avoid light leaks (great information is available on forums, but all scattered and untidy) and so on.

  8. #8
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Raghu View Post
    Changed few values in BaseLightmass.ini (only started to getting some understanding of it), still wrapping my head around photon mapping in Unreal. Don't know why EPIC is not helping out artists regarding the workflow concerning Photon Mapping for realistic renders. I am more then happy to help but my own results are based on experiments with loose understanding of some values. Still very much struggling to solve so many problems in lighting. EPIC documents are not at all helpful.

    We all know Rafeal and Koola are able to get the results we all desire (not talking about artistic look, but technically their renders are almost without bugs), so technique is there to overcome all the hurdles, but EPIC is not willing to share the workflow.

    Why not make a making of - Unreal Paris - explaining every part, including Lightmass Settings (We all know the values which are available to "artist" are not at all helpful) with BaseLIghtmass.ini tweaking (it is not possible to get that kind of result without touching that ini file) , Proper Unwrapping techniques to avoid light leaks (great information is available on forums, but all scattered and untidy) and so on.
    We shouldn't have to work so hard to get good results, it's annoying after using an unbiased renderer like Cycles daily for my work.

  9. #9
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Raghu View Post
    Changed few values in BaseLightmass.ini (only started to getting some understanding of it), still wrapping my head around photon mapping in Unreal. Don't know why EPIC is not helping out artists regarding the workflow concerning Photon Mapping for realistic renders. I am more then happy to help but my own results are based on experiments with loose understanding of some values. Still very much struggling to solve so many problems in lighting. EPIC documents are not at all helpful.

    We all know Rafeal and Koola are able to get the results we all desire (not talking about artistic look, but technically their renders are almost without bugs), so technique is there to overcome all the hurdles, but EPIC is not willing to share the workflow.

    Why not make a making of - Unreal Paris - explaining every part, including Lightmass Settings (We all know the values which are available to "artist" are not at all helpful) with BaseLIghtmass.ini tweaking (it is not possible to get that kind of result without touching that ini file) , Proper Unwrapping techniques to avoid light leaks (great information is available on forums, but all scattered and untidy) and so on.
    What items do you change in BaseLightmass.ini that there was no light leakage?
    Like here: http://prntscr.com/8smr7n
    http://prntscr.com/8smtg2
    I would be very grateful
    Thank you in advance!

  10. #10
    0
    You don't need to touch the .ini to avoid light leakage! It's possible to make splotch-free and leak-free scenes with the settings we have in the editor.

    The only thing that would help maybe in there is the lighting build time/quality ratio but you need very good understanding of photon mapping...even then...

    Remember when people started to believe that the famous bounce cards setup was the absolute best way to get nice results? Well, Rafareis123 doesn't even use them in his last scene. I feel it's the same with the .ini. Everyone wants/thinks it's where the magic happens. I doubt it.

  11. #11
    0
    How did you create the material curtains?
    Did you use Spotlight outside in this scene?

  12. #12
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by heartlessphil View Post
    You don't need to touch the .ini to avoid light leakage! It's possible to make splotch-free and leak-free scenes with the settings we have in the editor.

    The only thing that would help maybe in there is the lighting build time/quality ratio but you need very good understanding of photon mapping...even then...

    Remember when people started to believe that the famous bounce cards setup was the absolute best way to get nice results? Well, Rafareis123 doesn't even use them in his last scene. I feel it's the same with the .ini. Everyone wants/thinks it's where the magic happens. I doubt it.
    Yeah, I don't think changing the .ini unless you really know what you're doing is the magic bullet. It still comes down to good models, lighting, materials, mood, camera location, post processing.

  13. #13
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by heartlessphil View Post
    You don't need to touch the .ini to avoid light leakage! It's possible to make splotch-free and leak-free scenes with the settings we have in the editor.

    The only thing that would help maybe in there is the lighting build time/quality ratio but you need very good understanding of photon mapping...even then...

    Remember when people started to believe that the famous bounce cards setup was the absolute best way to get nice results? Well, Rafareis123 doesn't even use them in his last scene. I feel it's the same with the .ini. Everyone wants/thinks it's where the magic happens. I doubt it.

    Yes, No need to touch .ini just to remove light leaks. Give attention to walls, roof and floor in 3D application where you model them, properly unwrap the models with good padding between UV islands, and give descent resolution to these to avoid light leaks. Test your scene on production quality starting with .7 value in Static Lighting Level scale, Indirect Bounces 50-100 (Your choice), Indirect Lighting quality 2-4(depends upon your hardware power) and Indirect Lighting Smoothness .85. These values are more then sufficient to test your scene for problems related to light leaks and geometry errors.

    Then move towards the uncharted waters of Static Lighting Level Scale .15 or .25 values if you want to take your scene quality to next level. Here whatever Epic says, you need to tweak .ini file to get scene free from blotches and leaks. But that's the extreme. You can get pretty good results without .ini file if you experiment with editor lightmass settings.

    PS - I never used the reflector method(bounce cards) either, it's impractical if you consider Exterior/Interior together.
    Last edited by Raghu; 10-19-2015 at 02:38 AM.

  14. #14
    0
    What items do you change in BaseLightmass.ini that there was no light leakage?
    Like here: http://prntscr.com/8smr7n
    http://prntscr.com/8smtg2
    I would be very grateful
    Thank you in advance!
    Saw your lighting pass, you are getting there. But I am thinking you are going too extreme with values here, Indirect Lighting Quality 10 will give you unreasonably long render times. To get good contact shadows you need not to go that low always, I am Using Static Lighting Level Scale - .4 in this scene with Indirect Lighting Quality - 4 (Changed few values in .ini, but I am still not 100 percent sure about their actual benefit and How they are working - That's the main reason I am not sharing those, don't want to built unnecessary confusion on something which is already so twisted).

  15. #15
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by mihanix View Post
    How did you create the material curtains?
    Did you use Spotlight outside in this scene?
    It's a simple material(Image Attached). No spotlight outside, Only skylight for lighting from outside.


  16. #16
    0
    Raghu thank you very much. I will try your tips.

  17. #17
    0
    The picture is not loaded

  18. #18

  19. #19
    0
    Nice work Raghu. If you are looking for some feedback I think you gotta work a bit more on the reflections. Also the roughness on the bed seems too low.

    I would also use tesselation displacement on that brickwall, would help a lot to the realism at not a too great performance cost.

    How are you getting those nice shadows? Are you using direct spotlighting? What settings on the lights ? ( not lightmass)

  20. #20
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by RI3DVIZ View Post
    We shouldn't have to work so hard to get good results, it's annoying after using an unbiased renderer like Cycles daily for my work.
    Speaking of working hard. I'm testing a scene to make some still images 100% made in unreal. It's not going to be a playable scene but I want to see if I can reach vray's quality for standard renderings. It's actually quite easy and fast to make a scene for pre-dertermined camera shots. I'm using very very little geometry, 2d trees/plants but where the fun begins is with materials and effects. Adding fog, dynamic sky, emissive materials, water with screen space reflections, vertex painting, world displacement for materials, look up tables, all eye candy and get instant feedback is sooo much more fun than doing it the traditionnal way. Also, I made a 12 000 ish x 7 000 ish screenshot instantly!!! I'll post result soon. This is a process of only a couple of hours. Want to see how fast it's possible to make a good looking still from the modelling to the final screenshot! Also started to use procedural PBR substance materials. They look so good, especially when you add world displacement! :-)

    I want to replace vray/corona with unreal for good!

  21. #21
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by heartlessphil View Post
    Speaking of working hard. I'm testing a scene to make some still images 100% made in unreal. It's not going to be a playable scene but I want to see if I can reach vray's quality for standard renderings. It's actually quite easy and fast to make a scene for pre-dertermined camera shots. I'm using very very little geometry, 2d trees/plants but where the fun begins is with materials and effects. Adding fog, dynamic sky, emissive materials, water with screen space reflections, vertex painting, world displacement for materials, look up tables, all eye candy and get instant feedback is sooo much more fun than doing it the traditionnal way. Also, I made a 12 000 ish x 7 000 ish screenshot instantly!!! I'll post result soon. This is a process of only a couple of hours. Want to see how fast it's possible to make a good looking still from the modelling to the final screenshot! Also started to use procedural PBR substance materials. They look so good, especially when you add world displacement! :-)

    I want to replace vray/corona with unreal for good!
    I'm not a fan of V-ray they look good but all the same, Carona looks great to me. Looking forward to seeing your results then some tutorials!
    By the way Blender and Cycles you can preview your scene before rendering. I thought V-ray/Max had preview like Modo and Blender/Cycles now?
    Last edited by RI3DVIZ; 10-21-2015 at 09:24 AM.

  22. #22
    0
    Vray has an activeshade mode and corona an interactive mode but it's not as nice as working real-time. With offline rendering the preview is always noisy and slow even with decent specs. With Unreal, what you see is what you get right from the moment you drop something in the scene.

    + things like DoF, Fog, etc. are even tougher to render really quickly. I think the best interactive render I've used was Octane Render actually.

  23. #23
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by heartlessphil View Post
    Vray has an activeshade mode and corona an interactive mode but it's not as nice as working real-time. With offline rendering the preview is always noisy and slow even with decent specs. With Unreal, what you see is what you get right from the moment you drop something in the scene.

    + things like DoF, Fog, etc. are even tougher to render really quickly. I think the best interactive render I've used was Octane Render actually.
    Yeah but you have to build lighting in Unreal don't you? I don't understand because once I have built lighting and drop say a chair into the room I have to rebuild the lighting to see it correctly.

  24. #24
    0
    Yes but you don't always need the highest settings to get a good idea of what the scene is going to look like. Post process, VFX and materials change does not require a re-bake. Once your geometry is set in stone your good to go!

    Here's an example of a quick exterior render i'm working on for fun (the Chai Ballande). The goal is to do it fast. From 3d modelling to rendering in a couple of hours. it's w.i.p and I have a 12 000 pixel wide version of this screenshot on my pc. It's only a skylight + ultra dynamic sky, fog, DoF, orange LEDS. Tonight I'll add the 2d forest background, water plane with SSR. The building is pretty much 1 face for each wall, without thickness. Kept it basic basic basic. It takes 10-15 mins to bake the lighting in this scene! Of course it's not a very complex project.


    https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=1DB9E1BDDA9A04D2!75886&authkey=!AF5FLCeCFdBji3A&v=3&ithint=photo%2cjpg
    Last edited by heartlessphil; 10-21-2015 at 09:33 PM.

  25. #25
    0
    That looks really cool!

    What is SSR? All these acronyms confuse me. LOL

  26. #26
    0
    Screenspace reflections. There are 2 ways to have reflections in Unreal. Reflection capture probes and SSR. They can complement each other. But SSR on translucent surfaces is a recent addition.

    I took the water plane demo's translucent material and enabled 2 new features here :

    Name:  water.jpg
Views: 1774
Size:  395.0 KB

    It's more expensive but looks very good. In that particular scene (chai ballande) I don't really need reflection capture probes because most mats are rough and it's very foggy. SSR is enough!

  27. #27
    0
    Oh, thanks. I've been busy doing stills lately in Blender, no time to learn more in Unreal at the moment.

  28. #28
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by heartlessphil View Post
    Screenspace reflections. There are 2 ways to have reflections in Unreal. Reflection capture probes and SSR. They can complement each other. But SSR on translucent surfaces is a recent addition.

    I took the water plane demo's translucent material and enabled 2 new features here :


    It's more expensive but looks very good. In that particular scene (chai ballande) I don't really need reflection capture probes because most mats are rough and it's very foggy. SSR is enough!
    Nice! :-) Is that new ssr on translucent feature already available outside of the master branch? cheers! FG

  29. #29
    0
    Yes it's in the launcher version. 4.9+ (since 4.8 I think)

  30. #30
    0
    Unreal Engine Developer
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    566
    Fantastic work Raghu.

    Changed few values in BaseLightmass.ini (only started to getting some understanding of it), still wrapping my head around photon mapping in Unreal. Don't know why EPIC is not helping out artists regarding the workflow concerning Photon Mapping for realistic renders. I am more then happy to help but my own results are based on experiments with loose understanding of some values. Still very much struggling to solve so many problems in lighting. EPIC documents are not at all helpful.

    We all know Rafeal and Koola are able to get the results we all desire (not talking about artistic look, but technically their renders are almost without bugs), so technique is there to overcome all the hurdles, but EPIC is not willing to share the workflow.

    Why not make a making of - Unreal Paris - explaining every part, including Lightmass Settings (We all know the values which are available to "artist" are not at all helpful) with BaseLIghtmass.ini tweaking (it is not possible to get that kind of result without touching that ini file) , Proper Unwrapping techniques to avoid light leaks (great information is available on forums, but all scattered and untidy) and so on.
    I'm the engineer at Epic that made the Lightmass solver, among other things. I can answer any technical questions you guys have about lightmass settings, BaseLightmass.ini, photon mapping, etc. I'm not an artist though and I didn't work on the Unreal Paris demo.

    Sorry for the sparse documentation, hopefully it's something we can improve in the future.

    Short summary on BaseLightmass.ini: these are all values for various internal algorithms that Lightmass uses. We tried to make it possible to get the best quality with just UI settings, specifically IndirectLightingQuality, IndirectLightingSmoothness and disabling lightmap compression. We never intended for artists to set these directly hence the documentation is in SceneExport.h in the Lightmass source code. However, we're not going to stop you from setting them if you want, so BaseLightmass.ini remains.

    I would love to know what you have to modify BaseLightmass.ini for, so we can incorporate those changes into UI settings. Basically, help us identify what could be improved. When I investigate lightmass quality for a level in depth (as I have done in Realistic Rendering, SunTemple, Berlin Flat and others) I just stick to the Lightmass WorldSettings and have not found the need to change anything else.

    Right now I'm aware that quality in area shadows is limited on Production and I intend to increase the number of rays used in penumbras when you increase IndirectLightingQuality. (NumPenumbraShadowRays in BaseLightmass.ini)

    Also I've noticed that many of the best UE4 ArchVis scenes use an IndirectLightingScale of .1 or so. This is not something we anticipated at all, that setting is meant to be used for speeding up lighting builds in huge levels by using a value of 4 or so. So there are probably a number of bugs that become exposed when using a scale of .1, and I would like to investigate.

  31. #31
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by DanielW View Post
    Fantastic work Raghu.



    I'm the engineer at Epic that made the Lightmass solver, among other things. I can answer any technical questions you guys have about lightmass settings, BaseLightmass.ini, photon mapping, etc. I'm not an artist though and I didn't work on the Unreal Paris demo.

    Sorry for the sparse documentation, hopefully it's something we can improve in the future.

    Short summary on BaseLightmass.ini: these are all values for various internal algorithms that Lightmass uses. We tried to make it possible to get the best quality with just UI settings, specifically IndirectLightingQuality, IndirectLightingSmoothness and disabling lightmap compression. We never intended for artists to set these directly hence the documentation is in SceneExport.h in the Lightmass source code. However, we're not going to stop you from setting them if you want, so BaseLightmass.ini remains.

    I would love to know what you have to modify BaseLightmass.ini for, so we can incorporate those changes into UI settings. Basically, help us identify what could be improved. When I investigate lightmass quality for a level in depth (as I have done in Realistic Rendering, SunTemple, Berlin Flat and others) I just stick to the Lightmass WorldSettings and have not found the need to change anything else.

    Right now I'm aware that quality in area shadows is limited on Production and I intend to increase the number of rays used in penumbras when you increase IndirectLightingQuality. (NumPenumbraShadowRays in BaseLightmass.ini)

    Also I've noticed that many of the best UE4 ArchVis scenes use an IndirectLightingScale of .1 or so. This is not something we anticipated at all, that setting is meant to be used for speeding up lighting builds in huge levels by using a value of 4 or so. So there are probably a number of bugs that become exposed when using a scale of .1, and I would like to investigate.

    Cool finally the real dirt on the .ini.

    My experience is that I only used the interface no .ini tweaks. I feel everything is there that I need to adjust but I do find it, like Modo, a tweakers dream or nightmare. So, the test scene I did that I felt pretty good about had artifacts where a mullion joined a wall, the wall surface was blotchy like it wasn't getting enough samples (Modo term). I also find that getting good contact shadows is difficult but I increased my lightmap rez to 2048 and it was acceptable. My only complaint is that after learning Modo and Cycles/Blender I don't know where to go in UE4 to clean up things such as the mentioned blotchiness.

  32. #32
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by DanielW View Post
    Fantastic work Raghu.



    I'm the engineer at Epic that made the Lightmass solver, among other things. I can answer any technical questions you guys have about lightmass settings, BaseLightmass.ini, photon mapping, etc. I'm not an artist though and I didn't work on the Unreal Paris demo.

    Sorry for the sparse documentation, hopefully it's something we can improve in the future.

    Short summary on BaseLightmass.ini: these are all values for various internal algorithms that Lightmass uses. We tried to make it possible to get the best quality with just UI settings, specifically IndirectLightingQuality, IndirectLightingSmoothness and disabling lightmap compression. We never intended for artists to set these directly hence the documentation is in SceneExport.h in the Lightmass source code. However, we're not going to stop you from setting them if you want, so BaseLightmass.ini remains.

    I would love to know what you have to modify BaseLightmass.ini for, so we can incorporate those changes into UI settings. Basically, help us identify what could be improved. When I investigate lightmass quality for a level in depth (as I have done in Realistic Rendering, SunTemple, Berlin Flat and others) I just stick to the Lightmass WorldSettings and have not found the need to change anything else.

    Right now I'm aware that quality in area shadows is limited on Production and I intend to increase the number of rays used in penumbras when you increase IndirectLightingQuality. (NumPenumbraShadowRays in BaseLightmass.ini)

    Also I've noticed that many of the best UE4 ArchVis scenes use an IndirectLightingScale of .1 or so. This is not something we anticipated at all, that setting is meant to be used for speeding up lighting builds in huge levels by using a value of 4 or so. So there are probably a number of bugs that become exposed when using a scale of .1, and I would like to investigate.
    Hi Daniel.

    For me the hardest part now is getting good contact shadows without having blotches all over. The only way to get them is by lowering the indirect lighting smoothness but when you do that blotches appear all over where the lighting doesn't reach as much. Unfortunately I do not understand how the settings lightmass.ini work, but I think it would be a great step further if we could remove the trade between smoothness and " at the cost of indirect shadows losing details". Some other features would help greatly help our workflow ( not sure if it's possible):

    More volumes like lightmass importance - there is the option where we can increase the volume lighting samples, what if we could place more volumes in different areas where we would want the lightmass to have better quality ( do more calculations for a better result) and other areas where the normal settings are enough. Would it be possible to have a lightmass settings different per each volume ? Just like post process volume?

    If there is no way to get rid of the trade between contact shadows and smoothness how about having the possibility to find an actor's lightmap, be able to export it for manually edit and be able to import it back after the final production built? Shouldn't this be possible?

  33. #33
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by DanielW View Post
    Fantastic work Raghu.



    I'm the engineer at Epic that made the Lightmass solver, among other things. I can answer any technical questions you guys have about lightmass settings, BaseLightmass.ini, photon mapping, etc. I'm not an artist though and I didn't work on the Unreal Paris demo.

    Sorry for the sparse documentation, hopefully it's something we can improve in the future.

    Short summary on BaseLightmass.ini: these are all values for various internal algorithms that Lightmass uses. We tried to make it possible to get the best quality with just UI settings, specifically IndirectLightingQuality, IndirectLightingSmoothness and disabling lightmap compression. We never intended for artists to set these directly hence the documentation is in SceneExport.h in the Lightmass source code. However, we're not going to stop you from setting them if you want, so BaseLightmass.ini remains.

    I would love to know what you have to modify BaseLightmass.ini for, so we can incorporate those changes into UI settings. Basically, help us identify what could be improved. When I investigate lightmass quality for a level in depth (as I have done in Realistic Rendering, SunTemple, Berlin Flat and others) I just stick to the Lightmass WorldSettings and have not found the need to change anything else.

    Right now I'm aware that quality in area shadows is limited on Production and I intend to increase the number of rays used in penumbras when you increase IndirectLightingQuality. (NumPenumbraShadowRays in BaseLightmass.ini)

    Also I've noticed that many of the best UE4 ArchVis scenes use an IndirectLightingScale of .1 or so. This is not something we anticipated at all, that setting is meant to be used for speeding up lighting builds in huge levels by using a value of 4 or so. So there are probably a number of bugs that become exposed when using a scale of .1, and I would like to investigate.

    Thank you very much for the kind words. I am more then happy to see the developer himself taking interest in meager matters, hoping for the things to change for good now. Have created a separate thread for resolving the issues concerning lightmass.

    https://forums.unrealengine.com/showthread.php?88952-Lets-make-Lightmass-EPIC-%28and-understandable%29&p=405671#post405671

  34. #34
    0
    Unreal Engine Developer
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    4
    Nice scene you have here Raghu!

    From a documentation standpoint, would more technical information about each setting be useful, or would you guys rather see scene breakdowns and practical examples? They are not mutually exclusive but each person has their own image of what documentation means to them, and I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on how we could best lower the barrier to achieving the fidelity you all want to see.

    One other thing that would be nice to talk about is your expectations about workflow. Daniel and I were just chatting yesterday and there are definitely certain workflows that have built in inherent quality upsides, for instance directional lights have some inherent fidelity improvements that say lighting a scene from only an HDRI sky doesn't necessarily have, simply due to the performance requirements of realtime rendering, however these are all things we can talk about both documenting better and improving in the solver or via learning resources.

    Anyone with really high fidelity sample scenes who wants to share them with us for these purposes, we're always happy to collaborate with people trying to push the fidelity bar in this space. So far we have people lighting their scenes with bounce cards, directional lights, HDRI skies, the lightmass environment color setting, changing project settings, editing baselightmass.ini, static bakes, stationary vs. static lights, any combination therein of different techniques, and each has their upside and potential downside.

  35. #35
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Wyeth View Post
    Nice scene you have here Raghu!

    From a documentation standpoint, would more technical information about each setting be useful, or would you guys rather see scene breakdowns and practical examples? They are not mutually exclusive but each person has their own image of what documentation means to them, and I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on how we could best lower the barrier to achieving the fidelity you all want to see.

    One other thing that would be nice to talk about is your expectations about workflow. Daniel and I were just chatting yesterday and there are definitely certain workflows that have built in inherent quality upsides, for instance directional lights have some inherent fidelity improvements that say lighting a scene from only an HDRI sky doesn't necessarily have, simply due to the performance requirements of realtime rendering, however these are all things we can talk about both documenting better and improving in the solver or via learning resources.

    Anyone with really high fidelity sample scenes who wants to share them with us for these purposes, we're always happy to collaborate with people trying to push the fidelity bar in this space. So far we have people lighting their scenes with bounce cards, directional lights, HDRI skies, the lightmass environment color setting, changing project settings, editing baselightmass.ini, static bakes, stationary vs. static lights, any combination therein of different techniques, and each has their upside and potential downside.
    I can't speak for others but when I light a scene in Modo or Blender/cycles I use an HDRI only if I can get away with it (with sun if needed), if additional lighting is needed emissive geometry is the first thing because of the speed in rendering and lastly area lights - I'm talking about environment lighting both interiors and exteriors. Then for interior scenes lights from lamps, downlights etc. are IES. This technique is fast for render times and provides good results. I would like to be able to translate these techniques over to Unreal.
    Last edited by RI3DVIZ; 10-23-2015 at 09:41 AM.

  36. #36
    0
    Unreal Engine Developer
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    566
    So, the test scene I did that I felt pretty good about had artifacts where a mullion joined a wall, the wall surface was blotchy like it wasn't getting enough samples (Modo term).
    For me the hardest part now is getting good contact shadows without having blotches all over.
    The default Lightmass settings error on the side of reasonable build times, but relying on a fair amount of smoothing to hide noise. As you said, this destroys indirect shadows. We intend archvis users who want maximum quality to lower IndirectLightingSmoothness (.6 to .8) while simultaneously jacking up the quality with IndirectLightingQuality (4-10). This will increase build times a lot, but you get your indirect shadows back. Also make sure you disable lightmap compression and have sufficient resolution + good unwrap (generic requirements for anything lightmap quality related).

    More volumes like lightmass importance - there is the option where we can increase the volume lighting samples, what if we could place more volumes in different areas where we would want the lightmass to have better quality ( do more calculations for a better result) and other areas where the normal settings are enough. Would it be possible to have a lightmass settings different per each volume ?
    Unfortunately it's quite difficult to implement variable quality in this way. There would be seams at the edges of the volumes. In general, we try to make algorithms that automatically detect where more work is needed instead of making it a manual process. Some examples of this are photon mapping (which tracks where photons successfully bounced and emits more there, instead of requiring you to setup 'portals'), irradiance caching, and importance sampled final gathering.

    Different lightmass settings per volume is also difficult to implement, you'd have to know where you were in the world before querying settings. The direction we want to go in is algorithms that 'just work', rather than overcoming flaws by giving you manual control.

    If there is no way to get rid of the trade between contact shadows and smoothness how about having the possibility to find an actor's lightmap, be able to export it for manually edit and be able to import it back after the final production built?
    The problem with supporting exporting is that the lightmaps are in a special format which can't be directly modified. It stores directional color, as well as other attributes like sky shadowing. These are required to implement various features like directional lightmapping + stationary skylights (where you can swap the cubemap at runtime).

    This is the C++ class to demonstrate. Primary lighting is in a spherical harmonic which has negative floats - you can't edit that in a meaningful way.

    class FGatheredLightSample
    {
    public:

    /** World space incident lighting. */
    FSHVectorRGB2 SHVector;

    /** Incident lighting including dot(N, L) where N is the smoothed vertex normal. */
    FLinearColor IncidentLighting;

    /** Correction factor to force SH as applied to a flat normal map to be 1 to get purely directional data. */
    float SHCorrection;

    /** Sky bent normal, points toward the most unoccluded direction, and the length is the visibility amount (0 = occluded, 1 = visible). */
    FVector SkyOcclusion;

    float AOMaterialMask;

  37. #37
    0
    Unreal Engine Developer
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    566

  38. #38
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Wyeth View Post
    Nice scene you have here Raghu!

    From a documentation standpoint, would more technical information about each setting be useful, or would you guys rather see scene breakdowns and practical examples? They are not mutually exclusive but each person has their own image of what documentation means to them, and I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on how we could best lower the barrier to achieving the fidelity you all want to see.

    One other thing that would be nice to talk about is your expectations about workflow. Daniel and I were just chatting yesterday and there are definitely certain workflows that have built in inherent quality upsides, for instance directional lights have some inherent fidelity improvements that say lighting a scene from only an HDRI sky doesn't necessarily have, simply due to the performance requirements of realtime rendering, however these are all things we can talk about both documenting better and improving in the solver or via learning resources.

    Anyone with really high fidelity sample scenes who wants to share them with us for these purposes, we're always happy to collaborate with people trying to push the fidelity bar in this space. So far we have people lighting their scenes with bounce cards, directional lights, HDRI skies, the lightmass environment color setting, changing project settings, editing baselightmass.ini, static bakes, stationary vs. static lights, any combination therein of different techniques, and each has their upside and potential downside.

    @Wyeth - Scene Breakdowns with practical examples would be perfect with some technical information here and there to back them up (It's my personal liking, want everybody to share there thoughts). Didn't get fully what is meant by high fidelity scene, but I will be more then happy to share one of portfolio scenes for these purposes, if the scene qualify.

  39. #39
    0
    Wow yours looks better than the real thing!

  40. #40
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Raghu View Post
    Hi Friends,

    Created this loft space to test lighting and materials.

    Inspired from - http://www.archdaily.com/451601/san-francisco-loft-lineoffice-architecture




































    Where can I download this?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •