 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18-9-2013 15:44, jceddy wrote:
> samples 40, 400
By default, intervals is 1 and method is 3 in version 3.7. Accordingly,
samples needs only /one/ parameter, the second one being ignored.
instead of 40, try samples 100 or higher. Render time will not be too
much influenced.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> By default, intervals is 1 and method is 3 in version 3.7. Accordingly,
> samples needs only /one/ parameter, the second one being ignored.
>
> instead of 40, try samples 100 or higher. Render time will not be too
> much influenced.
Thanks for the tip on only specifying one parameter for samples.
I increased it to 400 and still get that artifact, although in general the media
effect looks smoother. I pushed it up way higher and am doing another test
render, although it is progressing much more slowly.
Incidentally, I ran the same code in v 3.6 just to test and have the same
artifact there.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I pushed it up way higher and am doing another test
> render, although it is progressing much more slowly.
The artifact remains after pushing the samples up to 4000, and it took an hour
and a half to render.
I don't think it's something that tweaking samples will fix, but I'm at a loss
to figure out what's causing it.
I attached the file from the 4000 samples run.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'skullthing4000.png' (88 KB)
Preview of image 'skullthing4000.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
This might be a red herring...I wonder if the artifact is actually due to some
interaction with the isosurface in CSG.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 09/18/2013 02:18 PM, jceddy wrote:
> This might be a red herring...I wonder if the artifact is actually due to some
> interaction with the isosurface in CSG.
>
>
maybe not such a red herring ... noticed in your example that you didn't
set a max_gradient value so it's 1.1 (default) ... was/is there an
warning message ... if so bump it up some until it goes away. btw: more
render time is the cost here
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
No, I didn't get a max_gradient warning, but I'll bump it up and re-try anyway,
to see if it helps.
I might try to do it without the isosurface, as well.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
That was it...I cranked max_gradient on the isosurface up to 5 and the artifacts
went away.
I'm still tweaking the samples value for the media to find the threshold where
"normal" media artifacts go away, but it's somewhere south of 400 for this
scene. ;)
Thanks for the suggestion!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"jceddy" <jce### [at] gmail com> wrote:
> No, I didn't get a max_gradient warning, but I'll bump it up and re-try anyway,
> to see if it helps.
See "Isosurface: max_gradient warning?" in p.beta-test.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Could max_gradient being too low also cause issues when doing CSG between and
isosurface and a solid mesh object?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Could max_gradient being too low also cause issues when doing CSG between and
> isosurface and a solid mesh object?
>
Yes.
If the max_gradient is to low, you may miss the surface of the
isosurface anywhere. It it cause holes in the isosurface, it will cause
problems no mather what other objects are used, not only a mesh with an
inside vector.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
