PhotonGI cache

Discussion related to the LuxCore functionality, implementations and API.
User avatar
lacilaci
Donor
Donor
Posts: 1969
Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 5:16 am

Re: PhotonGI cache

Post by lacilaci »

Dade wrote: Wed Feb 13, 2019 4:41 pm
lacilaci wrote: Wed Feb 13, 2019 3:59 pm And here are my "lucky numbers" (at least it seem to work in testscenes so far)

Photon count: 10 000 000
depth: 8
max size: 600 000
lookup radius: 40cm

4 minute rendering:
A.jpg
3 minute rendering:
B.jpg

but yeah, testscenes... I'm super busy right now to make new project (and my current work renders(also using luxcore :)) are under NDA and they aren't interiors to test)
Side note: try to export a scene and move around the camera in LuxCoreUI ... an hardware vendor could setup a nearly real-time demo station by using some serious hardware.
Actually, I've never used luxcore ui. I only know how to export from blender.... Don't know what to do next :D
User avatar
Dade
Developer
Developer
Posts: 5675
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 8:36 pm
Location: Italy

Re: PhotonGI cache

Post by Dade »

lacilaci wrote: Wed Feb 13, 2019 7:12 pm
Dade wrote: Wed Feb 13, 2019 4:41 pm Side note: try to export a scene and move around the camera in LuxCoreUI ... an hardware vendor could setup a nearly real-time demo station by using some serious hardware.
Actually, I've never used luxcore ui. I only know how to export from blender.... Don't know what to do next :D
Run luxcoreui.exe, load the exported .bcf(or .cfg) file, after the rendering started, you can just use arrow keys or the mouse to move the camera around.

P.S. disable HDR/sky visibility map or it will be updated at every camera movement.
Support LuxCoreRender project with salts and bounties
User avatar
Sharlybg
Donor
Donor
Posts: 3104
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 10:11 pm
Location: Ivory Coast

Re: PhotonGI cache

Post by Sharlybg »

Just manage to find time to make some PGI test vs Pure Pathtracing. here are the result :

Look Like my cache is not that good :( ( seem that 500.000.000 photton count/Max size + lookup radius = 5cm could give better cache) But this computer only have 8giga of ram (with 4go already used ).blender slowdown and crash when i test with such number :lol:

PGI Debug
Japan PGI + cache 10mn.jpg
PGI Settings
cache settings.jpg
cache settings.jpg (16.2 KiB) Viewed 5134 times
PGI 10mn CPU i7 2600
Japan PGI 10mn.jpg
PGI Denoise OIDN
Japan PGI + OIDN 10mn.jpg



Pure Path 10mn CPU i7 2600
Japan PathCPU 10mn.jpg
Pure Path Denoise OIDN
Japan PathCPU+ OIDN 10mn.jpg
Support LuxCoreRender project with salts and bounties

Portfolio : https://www.behance.net/DRAVIA
User avatar
Dade
Developer
Developer
Posts: 5675
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 8:36 pm
Location: Italy

Re: PhotonGI cache

Post by Dade »

I assume we are in a pretty good spot if people complain for rendering this in 10mins ... on a i7 2600 :lol:

Image
Support LuxCoreRender project with salts and bounties
atair
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:29 pm

Re: PhotonGI cache

Post by atair »

regarding fireflies and averaging:
wouldn't a median filter be more suitable to avoid fireflies in low radius search?
Its a shot in the dark..
User avatar
lacilaci
Donor
Donor
Posts: 1969
Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 5:16 am

Re: PhotonGI cache

Post by lacilaci »

Dade wrote: Wed Feb 13, 2019 10:49 pm I assume we are in a pretty good spot if people complain for rendering this in 10mins ... on a i7 2600 :lol:

Image
yes yes... But even in this example pgi scene is quite a bit darker.
User avatar
lacilaci
Donor
Donor
Posts: 1969
Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 5:16 am

Re: PhotonGI cache

Post by lacilaci »

Sharlybg wrote: Wed Feb 13, 2019 10:19 pm Just manage to find time to make some PGI test vs Pure Pathtracing. here are the result :

Look Like my cache is not that good :( ( seem that 500.000.000 photton count/Max size + lookup radius = 5cm could give better cache) But this computer only have 8giga of ram (with 4go already used ).blender slowdown and crash when i test with such number :lol:

PGI Debug
Japan PGI + cache 10mn.jpg

PGI Settings

cache settings.jpg

PGI 10mn CPU i7 2600

Japan PGI 10mn.jpg

PGI Denoise OIDN

Japan PGI + OIDN 10mn.jpg




Pure Path 10mn CPU i7 2600

Japan PathCPU 10mn.jpg

Pure Path Denoise OIDN

Japan PathCPU+ OIDN 10mn.jpg
the whole floor has no samples, I wonder where is the issue with this
User avatar
Sharlybg
Donor
Donor
Posts: 3104
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 10:11 pm
Location: Ivory Coast

Re: PhotonGI cache

Post by Sharlybg »

I assume we are in a pretty good spot if people complain for rendering this in 10mins ... on a i7 2600 :lol:
Sure :D !

I also still think there are room to improve the render on PGI to get better performance as my cache seem to be poor in quality. Or no :?:

I assume cache quality must be interpreted like this :

Bad

5m.jpg

Good

25m.jpg

Very Good

250m.jpg

Or i'am Completely Wrong :lol:


the whole floor has no samples, I wonder where is the issue with this
I think all shiny surface at some point are not included in the cache. The table / the Lamp / Tv + Tv furniture / white chair in the other room / and the floor.
Support LuxCoreRender project with salts and bounties

Portfolio : https://www.behance.net/DRAVIA
User avatar
lacilaci
Donor
Donor
Posts: 1969
Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 5:16 am

Re: PhotonGI cache

Post by lacilaci »

If there would be a way to estimate cache quality then we might end up with quality parameter instead photon count and cache size.
Have photon count 5 or 10x the cache size and scale them using some estimation that would be controlled using a multiplier.
Don't know how to set a proper lookup radius as this can be very prone for leaking/bleeding or cache fireflies as Dade called them.
User avatar
B.Y.O.B.
Developer
Developer
Posts: 4146
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 10:08 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: PhotonGI cache

Post by B.Y.O.B. »

atair wrote: Thu Feb 14, 2019 2:01 am regarding fireflies and averaging:
wouldn't a median filter be more suitable to avoid fireflies in low radius search?
Its a shot in the dark..
The problem about the median filter is that it is very slow, if I'm not mistaken.
Post Reply