Over the years I've made several attempts to appreciate IBL lighting with little success. From what I can tell, an IBL light simply provides a general cast over the entire scene. This is the same whether you are using a fancy shiny globe based image, a regular (flat) image or no image at all.

So why all the fuss about IMAGE based lighting? Other than a general, scene-wide cast what is the image supposed to do for you?

An old thread - has several images in a row showing how an IBL with an image does NOT look the same as with no image at all.

After following the link, scroll up a bit and start reading.

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?thread_id=2737823&page=64#message_3428139

If we're talking in general about IBL and not Poser specific IBL its useful if you want to blend your render in with a photographic image (eg someone wants to add a CGI special effect to a film scene). The IBL will not only match the lighting but also add reflections. The globe images are full 360 degrees which would be required for a true IBL render.

HDRI on bill's envsphere allows more realistic rendering than ordinary scene with default poser lites.  it's the most advanced implementation of IBL in poser yet provided.  old-style poser 6 IBL is now obsolete, but at the time it was way more advanced than poser 4 lighting, which unfortunately we still see in uninformed renders.

Quote - Over the years I've made several attempts to appreciate IBL lighting with little success. From what I can tell, an IBL light simply provides a general cast over the entire scene. This is the same whether you are using a fancy shiny globe based image, a regular (flat) image or no image at all.

So why all the fuss about IMAGE based lighting? Other than a general, scene-wide cast what is the image supposed to do for you?

The image provides subtle changes in light color, which result in more realistic overal (global) lighting, especially if the image in use is high dynamic range. Older versions of Poser (5 and 6) only supported LDR images, but it was still useful, combined with AO, to get realistic lighting with only two light sources in the scene.  Unlike the use of dozens, or hundreds of point or spotlights, IBL is easier to set up, and along with irradience calculations, provides more professional, realistic renders.

The IBL image also provides a way to include complex environmental effects for reflective and refractive materials in the scene, instead of faking those with texture maps or other means.

I hate to be one of those internet guys who do this but reading through the thread )and the one linked to) it's starting to get to me....so I have to point out that every time you put light or lights or lighting at the end of IBL you are saying Image Based Light Lighting and Image Based Light Light or Image Based Light Lights. Wouldn't it be better to just say IBL and leave it at that?

It's like saying, "I'm taking money out from the ATM machine".

Quote - I hate to be one of those internet guys who do this but reading through the thread )and the one linked to) it's starting to get to me....so I have to point out that every time you put light or lights or lighting at the end of IBL you are saying Image Based Light Lighting and Image Based Light Light or Image Based Light Lights. Wouldn't it be better to just say IBL and leave it at that?

I don't think it's appropriate to just say IBL in all cases.  IBL is a process, consisting of various subjects.  In some cases, being specific in reference to which part of that process is required. IBL in some applications, including Poser, requires a light and an image (the light being a dome emitter).  So if you're talking about IBL, you can still specifically refer to the Light, and it wouldn't be redundant.

IBL is one of the newer and improved lighting system to render with.
your more app to get a realistick render with IBL.

I also realy like IBL to model with.

K. I just was thinking about it and I'm like, I wouldn't say I was using a spotlight light and that's when it started nagging at me but I understand everyone's points. Carry on. :)

Quote - K. I just was thinking about it and I'm like, I wouldn't say I was using a spotlight light and that's when it started nagging at me but I understand everyone's points. Carry on. :)

Oh I understand, and agree it's used improperly in most cases.  I'm guilty as charged sometimes.  Same thing with HDRI.  It's redundant to say HDRI Image, although it's often referred to as such.  However, you might say HDRI light, if it was in context to the light source using the HDR image.

No worries. :biggrin:

Using IBL/HDR is a great way to light your scene, as well as providing the needed off screen background for great reflections. The IBL implementation in Poser isn't as user friendly (i.e. as easy to set up) as in some other applications, but it's still very useful for great lighting and effects.

One key is to make sure the image you are using will actually provide the type of light you want. I've come across a few images that simply didn't work as well as expected. It's also very important to have the image oriented/rotated correctly to provide the lighting you want, because having the "birght sun" light your scene from the back probably isn't the the light setup your looking for (not an uncommon issue to have to rotate the image).

The attached image (click on it to see the full sized version) was rendered in Octane, but it's a good example of a scene that is lit with only the HDR image. It also demontrates the value of the background reflections they can provide (actually, there are a couple of mesh lights in the building which helped provide a bit more visibility through the glass into the building, but they weren't used to light the focal or main part of the scene).

The link provided by Bagginsbill should help you a lot for using IBL in Poser.

Quote - I hate to be one of those internet guys who do this but reading through the thread )and the one linked to) it's starting to get to me....so I have to point out that every time you put light or lights or lighting at the end of IBL you are saying Image Based Light Lighting and Image Based Light Light or Image Based Light Lights. Wouldn't it be better to just say IBL and leave it at that?

~laffin~  You and me both.  My pet peeves are "ATM Machine,"  "PIN Number" and my wife's favorite "hamburger meat"

"HDRI on bill's envsphere allows more realistic rendering than ordinary scene with default poser lites.  it's the most advanced implementation of IBL in poser yet provided."

I know it was a couple days earlier than the reality 3.1 release; but, R3.1's integration with sIBL is probably the most advanced implementation(and easiest) of ibl in poser.  I've not had the opportunity to use octane's ibl; but, I use ibl in nearly every render I create and R3.1's is the easiest and nicest looking(for me) to date.

sIBL is very good - have used it in poser.  but try explaining to users how to convert the sun position (poser infinite lite with altitude and azimuth) to UV-coords.  fortunately the ones I used were always (u,v)=(0.66,0.33) or something obvious.

Quote - sIBL is very good - have used it in poser.  but try explaining to users how to convert the sun position (poser infinite lite with altitude and azimuth) to UV-coords.  fortunately the ones I used were always (u,v)=(0.66,0.33) or something obvious.

have never needed to use the sun with sibl in poser.. in fact.. if you use the sun light you're sort of defeating the purpose and working against yourself since the sphere used for the ibl blocks out the sunlight.  ibl's are meant to be used to give realistic environmental lighting

Only ibl without an infinite look like a rainy day no ?

Quote - Only ibl without an infinite look like a rainy day no ?

Depends on the ibl you're using and it's rotation in the scene.  There's one that's at hdrlabs called Playa Sunset or something like that.. i've put the sun setting behind my character and it was beautifully shadowed and I had to put in a mesh light to fill in so you could see her face.. then i rotated it around so that it was behind the camera and you could see the glow of the setting sun in her eyes.

then i've used the desert highway set from hdrlabs and the sun in it was so harsh i had to use diffusers to reduce the glare..

a lot of it is about the quality of the ibl itself.  most of the content providers(i'm not saying all.. just most) that release ibl lights for poser and studio are NOT photographers.  the ones releasing the sets at hdrlabs are usually professional photographers who do nothing but work in hdr pictures.

on a side note.. got a new cell phone last night  an LG F3.  it's camera is capable of taking hdr panorama shots.. i just might have to play around some with it.

Quote - have never needed to use the sun with sibl in poser.. in fact.. if you use the sun light you're sort of defeating the purpose and working against yourself since the sphere used for the ibl blocks out the sunlight.  ibl's are meant to be used to give realistic environmental lighting

Poser IBL doesn't use a real sphere - it's just conceptual.

My EnvSphere (which is real) with IDL does not block the sunlight. It's set to not cast shadows.

IBL's are indeed meant to give environmental lighting, but they do not give the lighting of the sun - only the sky and ground. The sunlight is too concentrated to be picked up as a point light source with a 1/2 degree arc via IBL or IDL. It is necessary to augment the environment sphere or IBL with an infinite light - otherwise you have no sharp shadows.

Very nice, Anthanasius. So what did you do differently between the right and left images?

Left only IDL, right IDL + Infinite light for the sun ;)

Some HDRI maps can produce sharp shadows without additional lights.  This does not apply to how IBL is handled in Poser, but it's possible to achieve this with HDRI.  If you scroll down this page to Shadow Sharpness, you'll see the comparison of a tone-mapped HDRI vs. IBL.

http://www.aversis.be/tutorials/vray/vray-high-dynamic-range-hdri.htm

When you don't capture the full dynamic range, you aren't capturing the true environmental conditions, and can't achieve sharp shadows from the sun in the image.  However, properly exposed, high dynamic range images, using only a small area of high exposure, can produce the desired result, without additional light sources.  I don't think Poser can handle these kind of HDR maps.  Would be great if it did.  Correct me if I'm wrong.  This is also the reason most IBL maps cast a blue hue over everything in the scene.  It's due to incorrect lighting balance in the captured image.

But, you ca tweak a little to have better specular and remove bluish with IDL, but never sharp shadows

Simple IDL

No more blue and more shadows and better specular reflection

Quote - Your article talk about renders under V-Ray, nothing ti do with the crappy Poser render.

Perhaps not, but it's still helpful to understand basic concepts, especially in regard to how and why things are the way the are in Poser.

The sharp shadows are due to dynamic exposure in the image, and not just because of Vray, BTW.

If you used those images in Luxrender, or Octane, you'd get sharp shadows.  I don't think POser handles HDRI like this, but that's the point of the article.,

Quote - An now, exactly the same scene and same picture for the envsphere, just playing with bias and math functions.

No more blue and more shadows and better specular reflection

Clearly, your own tests seem to indicate some better shadows can be achieved, just by adjusting the exposure of the image you used in the IBL.  Not saying you can achieve hard shadows, but it's a start.  Now what would happen if you used a properly exposed HDR image as the IBL image source?  Possibly even better results, without any direct light source?  Probably not, but that's the point of the article.  Nothing to do with Vray.

poser works well with hdri (0 <= rgb <= 32) on bill's envsphere.  when using ones with visible sun, area subtended by sun and glare around it (rgb >> 1) is too large for sharp shadows.  FFRender calculates transition from sharp to blurred sun shadow using raytracing, like when horizontal occluder casts shadow on vertical surface.

other advantage to using inf. lite for sun in poser: kills IDL corner artifacts whilst allowing speedier renders (interpolation and low samples).

Well well well. I take back some of what I said. I read the vray link, and although I knew the things it said, I didn't quite know the absolute importance of 12 EV dynamic range. I mean, I know that it's a ratio of 4096 to 1, but I've also assumed that photographers who make these HDRI know what they're doing and make sure to take the photos with a good EV range. It would seem they frequently do not.

Here is a render I just did in Poser, using one from this page:

http://www.hdrlabs.com/sibl/archive.html

called Desert Highway. I selected the image Road_to_MonumentValley_Ref.hdr from within that zip file.

At first, it produced the usual blue cast, no shadow render we see all the time. Then I used my EnvSphere nodes to manipulate the contrast, artificially boosting the dynamic range to a much higher level. I also increased my IDL samples to 8000.

Are you ready to see it?

Quote - Here it is, no directional light - lit only by my highly-manipulated copy of that HDR.

Bingo!  That looks incredible.

I rest my case.  It may just be the angle of the shot, but the sampling in the corners of the box looks very good too.  I don't see the typical render artifacting in the corners of the interior space.  Although i'm sure it did nothing to solve that issue, it probably does as much as the addition of a direct light.   How is render time vs. standard direct light substitution?  Great results.

it looks good.  is possible to use augmented hdri as background, or do you use 2nd sphere with sIBL jpg on it, slightly outside hdri sphere?

maxxx: bill used enuff samples to lose the artifacts.

Cool bagginsbill !

You're talking about HDRI map, what's about simple equirectangular jpeg ?

Curious to see the shader :D

shader is likely bill's envsphere shader with hdrlabs hdri plugged in.  increase hsv value to 4 or 8 for some of them, as dynamic range may only be from 0<= rgb <=4, which is not full 32-bit hdri that FFRender can use.  I don't know which node he used to change contrast; maybe gamma.

in desert highway hdri, sun is at photoshop limit for 32-bit hdr, but one can use much higher values for white in poser, e.g. 100 or 1000.  sky is very bright, only dropping to rgb ~ 0.3 in polarised area.

p.s. this is what I got w/desert hiway sIBL set.

YMMV

That's most excellent.  The impossible made possible.  This should be garnering more excitement in the community, because that makes lighting much more accurate, and glossy reflections a better match to the environment as well (not requiring a point-based artificial direct light source).

Great work.  The shadow in that render above looks as good or better than a raytraced infinite.

Well done Nancy :D

But is it possible with simple ldr or jpg ?

previous render uses point lite.  I've got one set up to delete lite, but haven't got time to render before quitting time today (chinese new year).  I also don't know if ground shader will work with it - may need recalibration of bill's free ground shader. 

will also work with jpeg as illum source. in above, jpeg version of hdri is background, whilst hdri provides illum.

previous render uses point lite

*Je me disais aussi, shadows too sharp for only IDL ;)

Where did you get the ground shader you've pictured? I don't have that one.

Here  ;)

Oh, that one! Thanks so much! When my last laptop died, I lost a lot of BB's shaders that he'd published since 2012 came out. I've found some of them again, but not all of the shaders that I remember having.

Here 3 renders

Firts i use BB shader

Second i use the shadow caster in the materian room

Third i use a prop with asphalt BB shader

Look the occlusion, look better in 2 and 3 render.

Reflection look more realistic in the 3 render.

There is a good reason many don't take photos in the right range BB, and that's because the camera they own is not capable of doing so.

Many digital camera CCDs just can't do it.

Quote - previous render uses point lite.

Oh.  Well, I take back the part about the shadows then, because that's really what I was most interested in here.

Bill achieved a very nice shadow without point lite or infinite in his scene, so it's been proven possible, and that's what really matters.

The "trick" with Octane to get sharp shadows wirh hdr images is to raise the gamma for the HDR. The default is value is 1, and that gives very soft lighting like in the first image I posted, in this image it was at 2.2.

I'm not sure how you would replicate this in Poser, but it should be possible.

Hi, everybody. I'm the OP. This thread ran off and left me behind a long time ago, but it looks like it's been helpful to others, so that's good.  I understand a tiny bit more about IBL than I did before, so that's good also, but mainly I think I've reached the point where I need to remind myself that this is just a hobby for me.

Carry on.

Quote - Hi, everybody. I'm the OP. This thread ran off and left me behind a long time ago, but it looks like it's been helpful to others, so that's good.  I understand a tiny bit more about IBL than I did before, so that's good also, but mainly I think I've reached the point where I need to remind myself that this is just a hobby for me.

Carry on.

Very few if any Pro's render in Poser.So that leaves Hobbyist.
Try out all the cool tech the Artist are talking about.
Push Poser to the limmit ,even Hobbyist can look like Pro's

Quote - There is a good reason many don't take photos in the right range BB, and that's because the camera they own is not capable of doing so.

Many digital camera CCDs just can't do it.

While it's true that most cameras aren't able to do HDRI in one exposure, every camera which is capable of bracketed images can provide pictures which can be processed to HDRIs with the appropriate software. So when you attempt to do an HDRI and fail, there is no reason to blame it on the camera.