Quote - > Quote - > Quote - > Quote - Lux won't do this (two media) in one go

I'm interested in what this means. Can you elaborate?

Thanks.

 

Hi Paolo,

I tried to do a render with the camera/view partly 'submerged', so I positioned the camera accordingly, looking a tiny bit up.

That setup surprisingly gave me a render 100% above the water surface.

I thought "maybe it's the procedural ripples, and the camera happens to be in a low area by accident".

So, for the next render I lowered the camera a bit, just enough to be sure a part of it would always be below the surface, and I got a render 100% submerged. Again, not what I wanted.

Then I tilted the camera up a tiny bit, without moving it, and I to my amazement got a render 100% above water again!

This led me to my conclusion Lux can only 'look' through one frame filling medium at a time. Not strange when you think about it, but a pity non the less (if indeed true).

I ended up compositing both versions in Photoshop, but I flipped the underwater scene up side down, and used the warped reflection on the surface for the submerged part, because the true view was too clear and not 'underwatery' enough to my taste.

Dirty tricks all over this time, sorry, can't help it ; )

Cheers!

This isn't all that surprising really. Your typical over/under water shot has something that lux does not: an actual lens for the water to touch. I think if you can line up your water with a surface for geomety to touch, that will help define that 'magic' line.

 

Dirty little secret: Lux's perspective camera does not have any physical volume. It's like a weird singularity-pinhole-camera. :P It exists only at the camera object's center point.

 

Modeling a surface for the lens is actually a really good idea I never though of. A small box of architectural glass ought to do the job nicely.