Luxcore vs real Photo

Discussion related to the LuxCore functionality, implementations and API.
User avatar
Dade
Developer
Developer
Posts: 5672
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 8:36 pm
Location: Italy

Re: Luxcore vs real Photo

Post by Dade »

daros wrote: Mon Nov 02, 2020 1:48 pm But since we have only two variables, material and light, it is not even so important. Color bleeding would behave proportionally in the same way even if the white material is 5% warmer or colder, or if light is 5% warmer or colder.
No, it does all the difference if you are using a matte (0.5, 0.5, 0.5) or matte (1.0, 1.0, 1.0). Or if you use a matte or glossy material.

Copper is copper but on what basis have chosen the material type anf the materials parameters of white material ?
Support LuxCoreRender project with salts and bounties
daros
Posts: 280
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2019 3:25 pm
Location: inside human language
Contact:

Re: Luxcore vs real Photo

Post by daros »

I used rectangular led lights with a CRI 95 and measured kelvin of 4250.
The problem is not the copper image by itself. It's the relation of the full white image with the copper image which points to a color bleeding problem.
daros
Posts: 280
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2019 3:25 pm
Location: inside human language
Contact:

Re: Luxcore vs real Photo

Post by daros »

Dade wrote: Mon Nov 02, 2020 2:31 pm
daros wrote: Mon Nov 02, 2020 1:48 pm But since we have only two variables, material and light, it is not even so important. Color bleeding would behave proportionally in the same way even if the white material is 5% warmer or colder, or if light is 5% warmer or colder.
No, it does all the difference if you are using a matte (0.5, 0.5, 0.5) or matte (1.0, 1.0, 1.0). Or if you use a matte or glossy material.

Copper is copper but on what basis have chosen the material type anf the materials parameters of white material ?
We used a common material which measures close to full white, natual lime. Then you told us white in lux coresponds to 0.7. So we did.
daros
Posts: 280
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2019 3:25 pm
Location: inside human language
Contact:

Re: Luxcore vs real Photo

Post by daros »

But wait, in a few days we should have much more tests and the problem will be easier to localize.
CodeHD
Donor
Donor
Posts: 437
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2018 12:38 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Luxcore vs real Photo

Post by CodeHD »

daros wrote: Mon Nov 02, 2020 2:39 pm Then you told us white in lux coresponds to 0.7. So we did.
I know this common reference, and wanted to nag about it before but kept forgetting... A regular good white paint can be over 90%. Reference for example: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/view ... nstruments

You mention "Natural Lime" explicitly, I didn't really find a clear general information on that, so you should check for your specific case.

When moving to a higher reflectance, make sure you increase the total path depth accordingly. Inside a closed white box, there will be many diffuse interreflections. What path depth did you choose, btw?
User avatar
Sharlybg
Donor
Donor
Posts: 3101
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 10:11 pm
Location: Ivory Coast

Re: Luxcore vs real Photo

Post by Sharlybg »

CodeHD wrote: Mon Nov 02, 2020 6:04 pm
daros wrote: Mon Nov 02, 2020 2:39 pm Then you told us white in lux coresponds to 0.7. So we did.
I know this common reference, and wanted to nag about it before but kept forgetting... A regular good white paint can be over 90%. Reference for example: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/view ... nstruments

You mention "Natural Lime" explicitly, I didn't really find a clear general information on that, so you should check for your specific case.

When moving to a higher reflectance, make sure you increase the total path depth accordingly. Inside a closed white box, there will be many diffuse interreflections. What path depth did you choose, btw?
This was my point since the begining. I am sure lot of super white materials goes above 0.7 or 0.85 of albedo reflectance.
Pure white lime look like magnesium oxide wich is above 0.85 to.
For the path deph we are on bidir 64 + 64 and already made test with 128 + 128 .
But Dade can maybe clarify if it is correct from the engine POV.
Support LuxCoreRender project with salts and bounties

Portfolio : https://www.behance.net/DRAVIA
User avatar
Sharlybg
Donor
Donor
Posts: 3101
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 10:11 pm
Location: Ivory Coast

Re: Luxcore vs real Photo

Post by Sharlybg »

Can Luxcore standalone use .cube LUTs file for tonemapping ?
Support LuxCoreRender project with salts and bounties

Portfolio : https://www.behance.net/DRAVIA
User avatar
B.Y.O.B.
Developer
Developer
Posts: 4146
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 10:08 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Luxcore vs real Photo

Post by B.Y.O.B. »

User avatar
Sharlybg
Donor
Donor
Posts: 3101
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 10:11 pm
Location: Ivory Coast

Re: Luxcore vs real Photo

Post by Sharlybg »

B.Y.O.B. wrote: Tue Nov 03, 2020 5:57 pm Yes, it is done with an imagepipeline plugin: https://wiki.luxcorerender.org/LuxCore_ ... _COLOR_LUT
Example usage: https://github.com/LuxCoreRender/LuxCor ... dr.cfg#L76
I can see the option but nothing to load the Luts in the viewport. is there a special process to follow ?
LUTscube.jpg
BTW this return error with Luxcore standalone and wann't render.
00000.zip
(52.44 KiB) Downloaded 179 times
Support LuxCoreRender project with salts and bounties

Portfolio : https://www.behance.net/DRAVIA
User avatar
Sharlybg
Donor
Donor
Posts: 3101
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 10:11 pm
Location: Ivory Coast

Re: Luxcore vs real Photo

Post by Sharlybg »

B.Y.O.B. wrote: Tue Nov 03, 2020 5:57 pm Yes, it is done with an imagepipeline plugin: https://wiki.luxcorerender.org/LuxCore_ ... _COLOR_LUT
Example usage: https://github.com/LuxCoreRender/LuxCor ... dr.cfg#L76
I think i have understand how it should work. just that i can't apply it with my file not working with standalone luxcore.
Support LuxCoreRender project with salts and bounties

Portfolio : https://www.behance.net/DRAVIA
Post Reply