I bet I'm not the only one wondering what this indirect lighting is and does.

So I decided o do a small "with- and without"  comparison, attached below as a gif that changes bwtween the two. The only thing I changed was I unchedked the "indirect Lighting" on one render. Everything else is the same. Rendered with one light and the G2 Olivia.

The brightest one is the one with Indirect lighting.

FREEBIES! | My Gallery | My Store | My FB | Tumblr |
You just can't put the words "Poserites" and "happy" in the same sentence - didn't you know that? LaurieA
  Using Poser since 2002. Currently at Version 11.1 - Win 10.

Thank you very much!

Did you render with HSV Exponential turned on? Without it, we're seeing everything too dark, particularly in shadowed areas lit only by IDL. HSVE is like gamma correction, but easier to deal with as it doesn't modify incoming textures.

Set it to 2.0 or 2.2. Render again.

---

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Also, put her over a white square instead of the black square, and render again. You'll be surprised.

---

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Attached Link: BlinkyGIF of indirect lighting

Here's another comparison.  I like the effect.  In this scene it gives the wood a pleasantly "smudgy" quality, as if it's been exposed to city air for a few decades.

Also, P8 without indirect does a better job than P7 on the oblique light between
the houses.

Note that the blinky-GIF is too large to store in Rendo so I put it on my website,
at the link above.

My python page
My ShareCG freebies

Attached Link: Snowy scene

White square vs black square ... Here's what indirect does to a snowy scene. It's close to how the human eye sees a winter day, but probably not so good for a picture.

My python page
My ShareCG freebies

Living in the Arctic as I do, and therefore a self-professed expert on winter, yeah, that looks like what happens when I go outside on a sunny day after a fresh snowfall.

Where's this HSV switch thingie that you're speaking of?

lostinspaceman

in the render settings. tone mapping

> Quote - Did you render with HSV Exponential turned on? Without it, we're seeing everything too dark, particularly in shadowed areas lit only by IDL. HSVE is like gamma correction, but easier to deal with as it doesn't modify incoming textures. > > Set it to 2.0 or 2.2. Render again.

I actually did use the HSVE, but at the default setting of 1.60 since I wasn't sure what it did ^_^

Since then, I noticed your render settings and that you'd cranked up the IL Quailty a lot, so I tried that and this is the new result, also with the HSVE at 2.2 as suggested.

I also moved the floor so she's now at least partially overe a white tile (hard to know where the tiles go when they're procedural) - the main reason I put her on a black tile the first time was to better see the reflections in the shiny tile. But of course a black tile won't bounce as much light as a white one. I should have known :)

FREEBIES! | My Gallery | My Store | My FB | Tumblr |
You just can't put the words "Poserites" and "happy" in the same sentence - didn't you know that? LaurieA
  Using Poser since 2002. Currently at Version 11.1 - Win 10.

Nice, eh?

---

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

a good render Trekkie

Here my first tests so far: *Nudity*

1. V4 with one point light +AO no Indirect light. No Tone Mapping.

Mazak

Google+ Bodo Nittel 

The same picture with Indirect light on and Tone mapping Exponential 2.2

Mazak

Google+ Bodo Nittel 

And here with Tone Mapping HSV Exponential 2.2

Mazak

Google+ Bodo Nittel 

One tipp: for your renders turn down raytrace bounce to 1-2. Higher settings are a time killer with Indirect Light (and transmapped hair). :blink:

Mazak

Google+ Bodo Nittel 

Raytrace bounces also appears to be controlling the number of GI bounces.  This means that, with a setting of 1, a given ray will touch one polygonal surface (like the character's skin) and then go on to be reflected to one other surface, and then stop.  in other rendering apps, a very small number of GI bounces typically results in uneven application of GI light, leaving you with a blotchy image.

My Freebies

In Poser the Raytrace bounces are:

0 For Shadows
1 - 2 For Reflections
3 For Refraction Transparency
4 For Reflections through transparency

You didn't see difference on GI with higher Raytrace bounce.

Mazak

Google+ Bodo Nittel 

Nevertheless, that's what the text of a saved scene file says it's doing.

My Freebies

The meaning of num bounces changed over time during beta. I'm not sure what it is exactly, but I know it does affect it.

I think the GI bounces is one more than the set value, and/or a reflection ray does not count against the tally for GI.

What I mean by that is this. Suppose you have a scene with GI. You add a mirror and observe the scene via the mirror reflection. I believe the scene will look the same, even though technically one more bounce is needed to get past the mirror. That bounce does not reduce the number of GI bounces used to calculated what is reflected by the mirror. Were this not the case, then things would look different when observed directly versus indirectly via a mirror.

---

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

I really think reflection depth and GI bounces should have been on separate controls.

My Freebies

Me too.

---

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

You people testing out GI... you're not going to get "real" radiosity lighting effects with a single figure on a ground plane. You're going to need props for the light to bounce off of, or an enclosed environment for the same reason.
The shadows for the figures above are all completely wrong in terms of realistic radiosity lighting, because the light is only bouncing off the floor and off the figure and then going... nowhere, off into the Poser universe never to be seen again.

Stand someone up in an empty room in real life. There's no way you'll get shadows like those without a very bright light, in which case you'll lose features on the person herself.

Quote - You're going to need props for the light to bounce off of, or an enclosed environment for the same reason.

I'm aware of that and I expect Bagginsbill is too, but it's good that you point it out.  Although, with GI bounces at 1-2 - if that's really what's going on with "Raytrace bounces" render setting, and it does seem to be the case - it's pretty much bouncing off the floor and off the figure, and stopping.

My Freebies

Here my example with Raytrace Bounces 1

Mazak

Google+ Bodo Nittel 

And here here with Raytrace Bounces 6 it looks more distorted !!

Mazak

Google+ Bodo Nittel 

Quote -
I'm aware of that and I expect Bagginsbill is too, but it's good that you point it out.  Although, with GI bounces at 1-2 - if that's really what's going on with "Raytrace bounces" render setting, and it does seem to be the case - it's pretty much bouncing off the floor and off the figure, and stopping.

Well I haven't bought Poser 8 yet to test it out for myself. But I think it stands to reason that with only 1 or 2 bounces that's what would happen. Although in an enclosed room I'd think that rays would bounce off the walls and ceiling and back into the room, even with 1 or 2.

Quote - And here here with Raytrace Bounces 6 it looks more distorted !!

Mazak

And those are the artifacts that have me so very concerned.  They're worse if you have an enclosed environment instead of a simple ground plane.

My Freebies

That is what I mean Raytrace Bounce 1 look better than Raytrace Bounce 6. :blink:

Mazak

Google+ Bodo Nittel 

Well, while the artifacts are certainly bad, the lighting is closer to accurate on your second image.  Try loading a cube primitive and scaling that up so that it encloses your scene and the light and camera, like a room's walls would, and you'll see a VERY big difference.

My Freebies

You can get rid of the splotches only with higher Indirect Light Quality, Higher Pixel Samples and a Min shading rate of 0. But high raytrace bounce produce more artifacts.

Mazak

Google+ Bodo Nittel 

Or don't, that's okay too.

My Freebies

Attached Link: Interior scene

Here's an interior scene with a mirror and an ambient-emitting lamp.  Bounces=1.

In this case I like the non-indirect better.  The indirect just seems overexposed.
No artifacts visible.  (There's a black speck on EJ's blouse, but it's there in both
versions.)

My python page
My ShareCG freebies

I suppose this is going out on a limb here...
But does Poser 8 have radiosity disk caching?

Hi folks. Guess what everybody is doing wrong?

What is your Diffuse_Value on these props? Is it 1? Hmmm? A white color with DV = 1 means what?

Anybody ... anybody?

It means that 100% of the light that hits the surface is reflected in each IDL calculation.

This is impossible in real life, and will cause over lighting and artifacts.

In real life, each time light bounces from an object, less is sent than arrived. With shaders that tell Poser to model an EQUAL amount of light is sent as arrived, that means each bounce is just as bright as the last. After six of these bounces, you have an impossibly over-lit scene.

I, of course, have been using shaders with DV = .8 for a long time, even before GI. My shaders don't blow up with Poser 8. All the shader you have gotten elsewhere likely do blow up.

---

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

A diffuse value of 80% or thereabouts is generally recognized as "more correct" in all the 3D apps, I suppose. That's one of the first things I ever learned about rendering.

While I don't expect that this is the cause of the artifacts I'm getting, I'll try that too.  It hadn't occurred to me to reduce Diffuse_Value.

My Freebies

Quote - I suppose this is going out on a limb here...
But does Poser 8 have radiosity disk caching?

I think it does, but not in a way you can control.  One of my renders left a file on disk with a file extension that seemed to relate to irradiance caching but now it's gone (written and removed automatically and silently).  I don't know if this is useful to you.

My Freebies

I agree, it's probably not the cause of the artifacts you see.

However, it will cause corners where two flat planes meet to blow up. Any slight numerical variations in angles in the last bounce could result in a localized difference of near 1.0 between two close points in the GI calculation.

When done with DV = .8, the contribution of the last bounce is only 26% versus 100% when 6 bounces are used. Ideally, you'd use more bounces than that, getting down to 1-2% variation in the last bounce.

---

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

I will try this with diffuse 80% too. When some renders finished I come back.

Mazak

Google+ Bodo Nittel 

Ockham, is it possible that you have lights in your scene that don't cast shadows? In reality, all lights cast shadows - running an indirect light calculation over an unrealistic input scene will inevitably result in an unrealistic output image.

Quote -
I think it does, but not in a way you can control.  One of my renders left a file on disk with a file extension that seemed to relate to irradiance caching but now it's gone (written and removed automatically and silently).  I don't know if this is useful to you.

It might be something Poser is using at the time of render but not later.
True disk caching, such as in Mental Ray and Lightwave, creates a GI light map or a GI samples map and stores it to disk if you have it set to do so. So if you re-render the scene, the GI is already baked into it and it doesn't have to recalculate it. That's useful if nothing in your scene is moving, such as a walkthrough in arch-viz, where only the camera moves.
If Poser 8 were doing that you would know it, as the render time would only be long for the first render and all subsequent renders would be significantly quicker.

Quote - I suppose this is going out on a limb here...
But does Poser 8 have radiosity disk caching?

Just to confirm, on a render I have going right now, after the "Indirect Lighting precalc" phase completed, Poser wrote a file named *.icache, leading me to think this is the light map.  I think when the render completes it will erase it.  I don't see any option to control this behavior.

My Freebies

Quote -

Just to confirm, on a render I have going right now, after the "Indirect Lighting precalc" phase completed, Poser wrote a file named *.icache, leading me to think this is the light map.  I think when the render completes it will erase it.  I don't see any option to control this behavior.

Ah well, thanks. :-)
Seems it's not doing what I was hoping. One day, perhaps.

Here a example with diffuse 0.8 on all objects and raytrace bounce 1.

Mazak

Google+ Bodo Nittel 

Here a example with diffuse 0.8 on all objects and raytrace bounce 6. Less splotches now! :thumbupboth:

Mazak

Google+ Bodo Nittel 

Why such sharp shadows?
That is so totally not right for a GI render. Shadows should be sharp only where the object touches the floor and rapidly soften and fade towards the ends.

probably raytraced shadows with no blur, although I'm a bit surprised that what appears to be a shadow bias offset gap appears with higher number of bounces

My Freebies

I know Poser 8 doesn't have area lights, but what kinds of shadows does a luminous polygon create in a scene when used with GI?

Quote - Here a example with diffuse 0.8 on all objects and raytrace bounce 6.
Less splotches now! :thumbupboth:

Mazak

shading rate 0 ????
pixel samples 12????
raytrace bounce 6? 

holly s..... those settings are insane.

Attached Link: Snowy scene at 80% diffuse

Taking the "80% Challenge".  Here's the snowy scene again, with the big surfaces (snow, skydome, bricks) turned down to 80% diffuse.  No longer overexposed! QED BB.

My python page
My ShareCG freebies

Quote - shading rate 0 ????
pixel samples 12????
raytrace bounce 6? 

holly s..... those settings are insane.

The 12 pixel samples (actually, its 12x12=144) are wasted when using just a 1 pixel box filter. If you care about good antialiasing, use a large sinc filter instead - try it. Typically, 5 pixel samples should be sufficient for most scenes - only in cases with complex thin geometry (dynamic hair for example) more samples will make a difference.

i use 3 and it looks good enough IMO.

5 would be MAX for me.

In my discussion with piz99 we talked about to get rid of the GI artifacts when high raytrace bounces in use. To get rid of this artifacts you must raise the setting. My tests maybe insane but was necessary to show differences in setup. :rolleyes:

Mazak

Google+ Bodo Nittel 

Are you just not supposed to use spotlights with Poser's GI?  In Cinema I always use area lights/area shadows, and I'm beginning to suspect that the artifacts I'm coming are at least partly caused by all the rays being emitted from a single point (probably wastefully).  I fell back to my old method of a small array of spotlights and it seems to be quite a bit better.  Everyone else seems to be using Infinite lights (which is nuts imo, except for simulating sunlight) or point lights.  Actually this looks pretty good indeed, to me.  It's a hell of a lot better than I ever got with a single light.  Four lights here, a little triangle of three in the upper right foreground and one weak fill on the lower left.

Lowering Diffuse_Value did not help me with the corner-y artifacts I've been getting, although it does seem to help for large smooth surfaces, and I agree that it should probably be kept lower than 1 for all surfaces, I'll do that for everything GI-related in the future.

I still get some garbage around the border of the image but that's not quite so bad, I can just render a few pixels larger and crop the outside to get rid of it.  There is still a little trash around the thigh and boot.  I think if I add another light I could get rid of it.  Render time wasn't too bad either.  Antialasing needs a little work - fairly sure I left post filter at default, I'll change that.

Ignore that shit in the bottom right, that is coming from the "environment cube" I replaced the environment sphere with, to simplify things, but I didn't remember to drop it below the backdrop.

My Freebies

Mental note to set up a "light rack" because this method of having four lights all point at the same target isn't really ideal (many rays converge on a single point rather than acting like a cheapie area light as desired)

My Freebies

I'd say that looks considerably better.
I've been trying to fake area lighting in Poser for a good while now, and yeah, a whole shitload of spotlights seems to be the closest I've been able to get.
I'm still finding it hard to believe though that poser 8 doesn't have area lights. To me it seems GI is only halfway there if all you have to work with is straightforward raytraced point or distant lights.

in re: area light, using a glowing box or sheet as light source (no point-source lights in scene to cast sharp shadows) should give softer shadows but will also probably increase the splotch artifacts.  I think they may be ironed out once all the details of the new variables are explained.

This is acceptable.  Garbage around the border needs some attention but otherwise this is fine, sharp where it should be sharp and smooth where it should be smooth.  A box of four key lights in the upper right foreground, 5 degree blurred raytraced shadows, shadow min bias 0.1, 30% brightness; one fill spot with same settings in lower left, 30% brightness.

My Freebies

Settings...

Render time was something like 15 minutes? on my intel qx6700 2.66GHz.  I didn't really time it.  It was much faster than the approach of scaling up 10,000% though, many times faster.

My Freebies

I still think the shadows are wrong for GI. That's what you get with Poser's type of lights though, I guess.
Looks better though and the shadows are acceptable, considering your room isn't all blown out, and sharper shadows are more likely.

I have a feeling though we're soon going to see a lot of self-proclaimed "photorealistic" renders of people in bright rooms with impossibly unrealistic shadows. ;-)

Isn't there a python script out there which we can run to change all the diffuse values on something to .8 instead of doing it by hand?

Keep in mind that the shadows on the floor you're seeing are mostly perpendicular to the camera view and the blur is getting squished.

The realism gallery here is almost 100% Poser renders, often with nostril glow or long hair hovering parallel to the ground or what have you.

My Freebies

so since it says 8 bounces does this mean that the light bounces 8 or 6 times? 
can you show the same render with only 2 bounces? thanks

Based on what Bagginsbill was saying earlier, I don't really know how many times the light bounced.  Working with GI in other apps, more bounces GENERALLY means a cleaner and more accurately-lit render, so I really would like to leave it high rather than low.  I'll try it with raytrace bounces turned down though.

This is another angle that shows the shadows more clearly - the four key spots are spread out more than they should be, since I've not put any real effort into setting up the "light rack" approach, so it's a little too obvious what's going on.  The GI light is not as "spready" as I would like it to be, but this isn't too bad.  There are a couple of GI blotches on the leg where the boot is against the character's skin, and these do not go away even at max quality settings, but it's a lot better than I was getting with only one key light.  I have not touched tone mapping or attempted any gamma correction setup in any of these pics yet.  That may help the GI light to appear more "spready", hopefully.

My Freebies

The documentation on tone mapping settings is remarkably thin (less than a page) but I'll try the earlier full-body pic with default settings and post that shortly.

My Freebies

I'm guessing and have not done extensive tests to prove any of my guesses to even myself. Having said that...

I think that Exponential is nothing more than the final gamma correction step. I.e. the "Exposure" is an exponent. Each of R, G, and B of the final output are raised to the power 1/exposure. In other words, at 2.2, this is identical to GC at 2.2. But ! It does not do the pre-compensating anti-gamma on the incoming material the way Poser Pro does. Using only the final gamma correction, without matching incoming anti-gamma, you will lose saturation. I figure this mode is pretty much useless.

I think that HSV Exponential is similar, but instead of raising all three components to the same power, it only does it to the component that is brightest. For example, if R is the red component of a pixel coming out of the shader, and that R value is brighter than G or B, then R' = R ^ (1/exposure). Then G and B (the weaker components) are modified by multiplying them with the ratio of R'/R. In other words, after the exponent is applied to get R' from R, the other components are altered by the same ratio. This tends to preserve hue and saturation very similar to full blown GC without dealing with the incoming anti-gamma step.

It is not quite as accurate as GC. But my experiments with this indicate that it is very close. So close, that moving a light by a few degrees would produce a bigger difference than HSVETM versus GC.

Given my supposed understanding of how HSVETM works, I'd argue that the default value of 1.6 is wrong. I have been using 2.2 and getting results that look almost the same as Poser Pro with GC=2.2.

---

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

I tried it with the default exposure of 1.6 and it was ever-so-slightly different from rendering without it.  There was better handling of areas of the image that were only lit by indirect (bounced) light, but it was hard to tell.  I am re-running with exposure at 2.2.
oops, ps: mode is Exponential
edit/oops again: since Bagginsbill suggests that Exponential is pretty much useless, aborted and restarted as HSV Exponential

My Freebies

This looks pretty good, although the tone mapping has the unfortunate downside of lighting up some of the GI artifacts that were previously obscured by heavier shadow.  I guess for general puropose "high quality" scenes lit like this I will just plan on using an array of 6 or 8 key lights instead of just 4.

My Freebies

settings for above render time was in the neighborhood of 15 minutes, that's acceptable to me gonna take a nap now

My Freebies

Smooth Polygons is often the culprit on the GI artifacts. Needs a little work there - it's the classiic REYES self-shadowing problem. There's no Min Bias parameter for GI - we need one.

---

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

One thing mentioned in another thread is to scale up by 10,000% which kind of struck a chord in what's left of my brain.

I know renderers like VRay prefer that the scene is modelled in roughly real world scale because it makes the lighting more realistic.  I'm just wondering if Posers stupidly small scale is throwing things off.
(of course - I could be talking complete cr*p here, in which case feel free to tell me to STFU noob :biggrin: )

My Freebies
Buy stuff on RedBubble

if anybody is seeking a "GI bounces" variable (which they had in the previous version(s)), just wanted to mention that if the new renderer is like other professional renderers with GI/IDL/ISL, then there should only be ray-trace bounces IMVHO.

Why would you say that? Other renderers that can do GI treat reflection depth and GI bounces separately.

The "scale up 10,000%" method results in truly enormous render times.

My Freebies

"Other renderers" cost more...

My Store   My Gallery    Contact

no, pj, I'm just saying that, in this first iteration of their new GI GUI, they aren't gonna let users adjust some variables, perhaps because they'd go nuts trying to figure out what the best combination/permutation is.  personally I believe that in a ray-traced render, I would want to simplify it to the point where there are the same number of bounces specified by one variable for reflection, indirect diffuse, indirect specular and whatever other optical processes involve bounces.  I wouldn't wanna ask poser users to try to set 2 different bounce variables like in the earlier version(s).

Not even in "Advanced Render Settings"?

---

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Yeah I gotta agree with pjz there. This is a screenshot of Lightwave's render settings for overall render, where the raytracing options are, and GI, where all the radiosity settings are. It's really not confusing at all, once you know what everything does, and the amount of control you have is huge.

I also agree with BB. Actually I'm kinda surprised to find out Poser 8 has a GI option, yet apparently no "Advanced Render" settings.

Maybe they should have locked render dimensions too, because it may confuse some users to be forced to select a size for their output.  Probably being presented with a choice of filename is a challenge for some as well, it would have been better if that was hard-coded to "File1" "File2" File3".

My Freebies

PJ - Is your build number 10157?

---

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Yes.  I think I see where this is going.

My Freebies

I have way more artifacts than you pjz99. I used the same render settings. Probably the dif. is my lighting? I have one, out of the box IBL liight

nudity

My Store   My Gallery    Contact

LOL!

Sorry for laughing and all, but that's just hilarious there, phionix. :blink:

I'd advise everyone to stop fucking around with whatever you downloaded today and take a break.  Start fresh tomorrow and re-download whatever the correct version is.  All this work of the past day has been a complete waste of time.

My Freebies

Are you saying they put the wrong version up for download?
I think I made a good decision to wait until the weekend or maybe even later.

Are you serious pj?? We have an incorrect build??

what is it that we are not knowing BB??

My Store   My Gallery    Contact

Ignore me, listen to Bagginsbill.  He is paid to be nice, I am not.

My Freebies

I dont care about nice, i just want the skinny

My Store   My Gallery    Contact

According to other replies made very recently, it looks like y'all are gonna need a hotfix that I think was supposed to be supplied with the download. Something like that.
I'd post a link to where i read that but I already lost it and things are moving too fast here to keep up with it all. ;-)

It was not a mistake. You got the correct release build.

There is one after the release. I thought it was public knowledge and I thought it would be included in your download list in addition to the full install, the content, and the legacy content, I thought you all were downloading it.

I can't explain why it was not published on the same day. All I can say is it has a few small changes that were corrections to the official package.

It is a HotFix - an additional download. It will be available by end of week, but probably sooner. I have it already and thought you did too.

---

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Quote - if anybody is seeking a "GI bounces" variable (which they had in the previous version(s)), just wanted to mention that if the new renderer is like other professional renderers with GI/IDL/ISL, then there should only be ray-trace bounces IMVHO.

easy there. ok? 

you you need to have seperate control for raytraced bounces and lighting bounces. lets say i have a car in my scene. and i want 5 bounces of light. does this mean that i should render out a car with 5 raytraced bounces? are you even aware how much this is? noone uses 5 bounces for reflection.

Quote - hard to know where the tiles go when they're procedural

Does your video card properly support OpenGL? If so, you can get a very reliable preview of many procedural shaders. Under Render Settings:Preview, see if there's a bit of tiny green text that says "hardware shading supported", if so, tick the two boxes under it, hit "save settings", and then look at the viewport :)

It's pretty accurate, yeah, although depending on how fine the tiles are you may need to zoom in pretty close.

My Freebies

Nope, we don't have it.

:)

Tirjasdyn
http://michellejnorton.com

o.k., mike, thanks for the scrnshot. if anybody wants those items in poser, it may be possible to request those in kupa's PP2010 thread, hopefully this week, before the thread drops off the page.

I understand the part about setting bounces, but it may currently be simplified so the user only has to set ray-trace bounces, presumably because GI bounces are fixed at 3 (or some other figure designed to allow quick renders) by the software, just prior to render.  they may be able to add more  variables to the render GUI if enough people show interest and they have the budget.  but I hope most users can become accustomed to the current set-up first.  99.9% of these users have not tried to do GI renders in poser prior to the introduction of this new render GUI.

No, I actually got it direct from Stewer (Stefan Werner) that the Raytrace Bounces slider is controlling GI bounces as well as reflection depth (meaning, it goes up to 12, plus or minus one depending on what Bagginsbill was saying earlier about the exception made for GI bounces).  He said this was a design decision - hopefully they change the design and separate these functions, because it really makes no sense to keep them on the same setting.

My Freebies

Quote - PJ - Is your build number 10157?

10154 here, on my Mac version...