The scene I'm using has no lights and the "Light" materials are set to an Ambient Color of white with an Ambient Value of 7.

I've attached a final render and a screen shot of my render settings (using Dimension3D's "Render Firefly" panel). I tried raising the Pixel Samples and lowering the Shading Rate, but the only change was that the image took longer to render.

Can someone help explain why the image has smearing and "crackly" shadows?

Since there are no lights in the scene, I'm not sure how to adjust the Ambient Occlusion settings or the Shadow Depth Map size.

reduce smearing by not using IDL irradiance caching and increasing IDL samples, e.g. to 4096.  renders may be a tad slow with those.  do not use AO. enable GC (2.2). reduce IDL intensity to <=0.8 to avoid light multiplication.  FFrender calculates ray-traced shadows from diffuse light sources (i.e. posersurfaces with ambient 7) with reasonable fall-off, hence user need do little but watch it do its magic.

Can you try to post a render of the mesh with a neutral light grey and zoom in on an area where it occurs. Also if you can just screenshot the preview window at the close up. 

To me it doesnt look like it have anything to do with the IDL but the mesh it self, due to Posers way or way not to handle smoothing very well :)

To test whether its that, try the following with the roof part, as its probably easiest to see there. Select each of the polygons facing the same direction, meaning all those around the edge where the lighting goes wrong and then detach it to its own element. Personally i use 3DS max so if you use something else i wont be able to help how to do it. But once you have done that, try to import it into poser again and see if it still happens.

Whether thats the problem im not sure, but to me at least that seems to be it.

Attached Link: IDL and You

Miss Nancy- Thanks for the suggestions. I tried your idea of unchecking the option for "Use Irradiance Caching" and the image is still rendering! I'll have to see how long it takes and then try your other ideas.

3D-Mobster- Sorry, but I have no idea what you're talking about.

The mesh has already been optimized for use in Poser: all the facets face the correct direction, the vertices have been split in UV Mapper, and I never use Poser's "Smooth Polygons" option.

Modus0- Thanks for the link. I'll read through those ideas. :)

Hi John,

You might try

bucket size of 48

Shate Rate 0.05

Filter to Sinc filter 3

Lower your raytrace bounces to 1

1 for image in the chrome ball

2 for a chrome ball in another chrome ball

3 for a chrome ball refecting a chrome ball in another chrome ball and on and on

Pixel samples to 12 or even higher  (type in)

and maybe even try with enable Inderiect Light unchecked as a second attempt

Just my 2 cents worth

Tom

"3D-Mobster- Sorry, but I have no idea what you're talking about. "

Here is an example on a large scale where the smoothing goes wrong even though there are nothing wrong with the mesh. Its just that poser doesnt seem to handle sharp edges very well and therefore makes these weird things.

Example 1 the left side is from the preview where you can see some light areas and some weird dark shadows, when you render it the right side, you get bad lighting. Example 2 i have detached each side, which will make poser think that its actually 2 objects and therefore wont try to smooth between the surfaces, even though its one object. 

To me it looks like that is what is happening in your render, my example is just using a much larger object or edge than yours. But as i said whether thats the actual problem im not sure. But i have to say it looks a lot like it as i have had problems with it before, and have fixed it like that. But it doesn´t happens with all objects and why it happens in the first place im not sure. In some cases you can turn off smooth polygons in poser and set crease angle to 0, but it might create problems else where in the mesh. So detaching things seems to be the only certain way for fixing it that i have found at least. 

Both example uses same default poser light and same IDL settings.

Also forgot to say that when you export from your modeling program, make sure that optimize verts is not checked or the export will weld the edges you spent time spliting.

Tom

Hi there

I would reduce Bucket size to 32,this should be enough and should result in faster render too,96 bit high for me,but maybe you have good reason to use 96..

Pixel samples I don't think they can cause those smearing or those leaks,I usually render with 3-5(12 I'm using when I'm rendering with DOF),Raytrace bounces 4 is too bit high,3 should be enough,Irradiance cache is very similar to my setting,intensity is OK too,but if you are using GC then i would probably would lower this and Bounces too,I've tried various settings with 2-6 and for me best one has been 2 and about the using AO with IDL,I've tried to use,but after few tests I'm not using AO with IDL

Second thing I would try tweak materials,I know from personal experience,on some props or interiors I've got several leaks,which I've sorted with tweaking the diffuse(usually vendors set this to 1.0,but I've changed this to 0.88-0.92 and everything has rendered like should )

Did you render this with GC or without the GC?

Thanks,Jura

Miss Nancy says to not use Irradiance Cache, but the discussion in the other thread says to use a value between 80 and 90.

And DreamlandModels says to turn off IDL completely. I'm not sure how this tells Poser to use indirect lighting to light an interior scene.

3D-Mobster- don't take this the wrong way, but your box has way too many polygons. If that's supposed to be a basic 6-sided cube, why are there so many poly around the corner area? This is probably why Poser is getting confused about how to render those polys.

I think your solution may be to optimize the model before bringing it into Poser. For example, do you really need all those polygons along the corner? Could they be combined into 1 polygon per side? See the image for what I mean.

jura11- I've always used a bucket size of 92 since I've thought a bigger bucket size results in a faster render. Maybe the opposite is true and I should be using a smaller bucket size for a faster render.

I have't tried using GC, though I'll have to see what that does.

"3D-Mobster- don't take this the wrong way, but your box has way too many polygons.  If that's supposed to be a basic 6-sided cube, why are there so many poly around the corner area? This is probably why Poser is getting confused about how to render those polys"

hehe i totally agree why you say that, as it looks like a 6 sided cube in the render :D But actually its a huge roof and that is just a corner that i have zoomed in on. The big square in the top of the image is actually further down than those making the corner, which are actually a wall. Guess i should have considered that, as its a lot easier when you know what you are looking at.

 This is from the other side with shadows :D

So it makes a bit more sense.

Quote - Hmm... there seems to be conflicting information.

Miss Nancy says to not use Irradiance Cache, but the discussion in the other thread says to use a value between 80 and 90.

And DreamlandModels says to turn off IDL completely. I'm not sure how this tells Poser to use indirect lighting to light an interior scene.

3D-Mobster- don't take this the wrong way, but your box has way too many polygons. If that's supposed to be a basic 6-sided cube, why are there so many poly around the corner area? This is probably why Poser is getting confused about how to render those polys.

I think your solution may be to optimize the model before bringing it into Poser. For example, do you really need all those polygons along the corner? Could they be combined into 1 polygon per side? See the image for what I mean.

jura11- I've always used a bucket size of 92 since I've thought a bigger bucket size results in a faster render. Maybe the opposite is true and I should be using a smaller bucket size for a faster render.

I have't tried using GC, though I'll have to see what that does.

Hi there

I've tried with 80-90 but render has been very slow and results has been bit conflicting for me.

I always using 32 bucket size,its not if will be faster,but with higher bucket size not sure if does render faster,but for sure will take more RAM like with 32,that's my view on this,I've not used higher bucket size unles I'm rendering with 3DS MAX where I'm using 64 usually,but in most cases 32 is enough

With GC you shouldn't need too many lights and without the GC(or GC off) its possible to create nice render without the splotches etc,but you will need to tweak in material room diffuse and ambient settings and here is my thread on same question over on RDNA http://forum.runtimedna.com/showthread.php?88632-Dark-splotches-with-IDL

Did you tried to turn off emitters there on parts which are most affected? Sometimes this can help,but i would try to at least have look at material room and tweak there materials,plus this depends on the lights too

As I've used mostly only 3 light setup(IBL,Infinite acted as sun and Infinite just for shadows),but now I'm using several  point lights with turned to Inverse and lights are positioned above ceiling not far from ceiling but not too close and I've added too IBL with one Infinite light,this has worked for me in several scenes 

Thanks,Jura

Bucket size has to be a power of 2

2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256

But the default 32 is still the best.

MSR ?  0.05??? Ola, that is close to infinite. Gonna take a lôoooooooooong render time.

Going below 0.2, you have to set this on ALL groups in your scene.

vilters- Why does the bucket size have to be a power of 2? Why is 32 the best?

jura11- Just so we're talking about the same thing, by "GC", do you mean "Gamma Correction" or something else? How would gamma correction affect the smearing in an image?
Also, I'm not using any lights in my scene- all of the illumination is coming from the Ambient Value of the "Lights" materials.

And just to confuse everyone, let's throw in another condition: I need the image to render within a 1/2 hour or less.

The reason is this: if I'm going to use this technique or render settings for promotional sales images, I can't be spending 2-3 hours waiting for one image to render. If I have to make 9 or 10 images, then that's 20 to 30 hours just making images!

VP if you want you can send the OBJ file to me and ill check it for you to see if what im talking about is the problem, dont need textures etc.

This has already been covered.

Please read my post at this link.

My opinion - add a point light and rely less on 100% IDL.

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?thread_id=2877142&page=2#message_4129433

3D-Mobster- That wall is part of a starship bridge product. I'm going to try some more ideas, but if those don't work, I'll send you the rear wall that's giving me the problems.

bagginsbill- Thanks for that link. I tried adding an infinite light to my scene, but I got the same results. I'll try a point light and see if that makes a difference. Though I think your comment from the other thread is correct and that Poser just won't do what I want it to do.
I could use Reality (or Lightwave or Vue), but I'm trying to keep the rendering within Poser so I don't have to adjust all the materials and I don't want to spend 10 hours waiting for Reality to finish rendering.

3D-Mobster- That wall is part of a starship bridge product.  I'm going to try some more ideas, but if those don't work, I'll send you the rear wall that's giving me the problems.  

Thats fine just send me a message. :)

Quote -  I don't want to spend 10 hours waiting for Reality to finish rendering.

Note that if you're willing to allow for more time, Poser can actually do this.

You turn off the irradiance cache, which is what creates the problem. But that slows it down to LuxRender speeds.

Quote - vilters- Why does the bucket size have to be a power of 2? Why is 32 the best?

jura11- Just so we're talking about the same thing, by "GC", do you mean "Gamma Correction" or something else? How would gamma correction affect the smearing in an image?
Also, I'm not using any lights in my scene- all of the illumination is coming from the Ambient Value of the "Lights" materials.

And just to confuse everyone, let's throw in another condition: I need the image to render within a 1/2 hour or less.

The reason is this: if I'm going to use this technique or render settings for promotional sales images, I can't be spending 2-3 hours waiting for one image to render. If I have to make 9 or 10 images, then that's 20 to 30 hours just making images!

Hi VP

Yes we are talikng about the same thing Gamma correction,as I've said,I've tested several settings with GC on and GC off 

There can be the yours problems if you are not using any light in yours scene and trying to render with only emmiters(Ambient Color and Ambient Value set at 7),i would use lights and lower ambient value,this can be good start

You are want to render with 1/2 hour or less,my god wish I could render my scenes in such speed,my renders takes around 20-45mins(longest render took me around 4hours) depends how densily is populated or how many props etc is there,but usual time is around 20mins

Agree if you are doing this for promotional purposes then lower render times are best way

Thanks,Jura

In life there is no scene at all, none, that does not include a direct light. Indirect light must involve a a direct lht to reflect. A computer screen is a dirct light, not an indirect one. It should include a direct one.

technically, they are discussing difference between poser directional lites, all of which are point sources, vs. diffuse-emitting posersurfaces, which are comprised of 1 or more polygonal faces, whose normal determines centre vector of emitted lite.  said polygons then emit lite in weakening distribution about said vector.