LuxCoreRender Forums

PetrT wrote: ↑Sat Oct 05, 2019 9:40 am Can be added sharpening menu
with modern algoritm

It could be implemented as an imagepipeline plugin: https://wiki.luxcorerender.org/Writing_ ... ine_Plugin

lacilaci wrote: ↑Sat Oct 05, 2019 9:54 am luxcore renders are often somewhat blurry

Try setting the pixel filter to "none".

B.Y.O.B. wrote: ↑Sat Oct 05, 2019 10:14 am

PetrT wrote: ↑Sat Oct 05, 2019 9:40 am Can be added sharpening menu
with modern algoritm

It could be implemented as an imagepipeline plugin: https://wiki.luxcorerender.org/Writing_ ... ine_Plugin

lacilaci wrote: ↑Sat Oct 05, 2019 9:54 am luxcore renders are often somewhat blurry

Try setting the pixel filter to "none".

I do, always... renders are always way too blurry still. Can't get razor sharp pixels unless I fix it in post or render way higher resolution and downscale. Not sure whats the cause of this.

lacilaci wrote: ↑Sat Oct 05, 2019 10:21 am I do, always... renders are always way too blurry still. Can't get razor sharp pixels unless I fix it in post or render way higher resolution and downscale. Not sure whats the cause of this.

I assume renders are too blurred after denoising. I doubt you can have blurred renderings with "NONE" pixel filter

Mention it because Blender has sharpen filter but
it make artefacts on high values

Dade wrote: ↑Sat Oct 05, 2019 10:35 am

lacilaci wrote: ↑Sat Oct 05, 2019 10:21 am I do, always... renders are always way too blurry still. Can't get razor sharp pixels unless I fix it in post or render way higher resolution and downscale. Not sure whats the cause of this.

I assume renders are too blurred after denoising. I doubt you can have blurred renderings with "NONE" pixel filter

denoising definitely adds some of it's own blurring but just a little bit and with enough samples almost none.
But even at none filter I see a lot of detailed stuff in distance being kinda smudged(I don't have this problem with cycles where I can render lowres render and still have razor sharp details-which would be bad for animation but super nice for stills)

To be clear, we are not talking about some heavy blurring here, just the details aren't sharp enough and look like a cheap camera lens or whatever would be the comparison.

Hi,

one more question is it already too late to ask what happend to the features that were postponed from V2.2?
I placed some wishes for integration of more scientific material definitions (like tabulated data from old lux render)

I really have lots of troubles to transfer wavelenght dependent material propertied (in real world) into something that really works with this RGB input that we have at the moment.
Another wish were the more scientific specification for scattering volumes (Heyney Greenstein coefficients maybe)
Additionally an option that allows to define the surface scattering for transparent and pure reflective surfaces (incidence angle dependent) - some kind of unique BSDF defintion - would be lovely for my tasks.

Thanks for keeping this wishes alive - if possible.
BR

lighting_freak wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 8:06 pm one more question is it already too late to ask what happend to the features that were postponed from V2.2?
I placed some wishes for integration of more scientific material definitions (like tabulated data from old lux render)

I really have lots of troubles to transfer wavelenght dependent material propertied (in real world) into something that really works with this RGB input that we have at the moment.
Another wish were the more scientific specification for scattering volumes (Heyney Greenstein coefficients maybe)
Additionally an option that allows to define the surface scattering for transparent and pure reflective surfaces (incidence angle dependent) - some kind of unique BSDF defintion - would be lovely for my tasks.

They didn't collected a lot of votes: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=308

They didn't collected a lot of votes:

Unfortunatly true!

Do you think this might be due to a lack of available real world properties?

I mean woudn't it be helpful to know scattering properites of real fog instea of toying around with shader parameters?
Maybe we can arrange some kind of scientific section that allows sharing of this information.

BR

Hi,

What do you think about integrating ray file support?
It would allow lux core a simple and correct usage of artificial real world light sources...

Follow this link to find some professional offered data, in this case for a single LED.

https://www.osram.com/apps/downloadcen ... A G6SP.01

This ray files describe very well the light behaviour in near field luminance as well as far field intensity. They can also be generated individually to integrate more complex lighting scenarios with little calculation effort.

BR

lighting_freak wrote: ↑Mon Oct 14, 2019 4:45 am This ray files describe very well the light behaviour in near field luminance as well as far field intensity. They can also be generated individually to integrate more complex lighting scenarios with little calculation effort.

That looks very nice! How does it compare to IES files?